The reading I am going to present is "The Ethics of Porn on the Net" written by Kath Albury analyzes the domestication of pornography , morality and ethics on the net.
Here is the outline of my presentation.
1. Four reasons of pornography for being immoral.
2. blurring of the categories of different posts in the internet pornography
3. Pornography is immoral
4. what's ethical about pornography?
Tuesday, March 31, 2009
Thursday, March 26, 2009
Outline - The Good, the bad, and the Virtual: Ethics in the Age of Information
This article mainly discusses the ethics issue of using the Internet. Since the internet is a new environment, it is a part of virtual world. So, it is not all principle or moral standard can be applied on it.
In the presenatation, I would state that
1. What is good and bad?
2. What is "the age of information"? Why do writer say it is the fate of ethics?
3. Is real world and virtual can share same moral norm?
4. How new media change the ethical enviroment? and how to solve?
In the presenatation, I would state that
1. What is good and bad?
2. What is "the age of information"? Why do writer say it is the fate of ethics?
3. Is real world and virtual can share same moral norm?
4. How new media change the ethical enviroment? and how to solve?
Wednesday, March 11, 2009
Critical Annotated Webliography
3. Frankenstein continues to occupy the popular imagination as a monstrous scientist. Analyse some of the ways in which Frankenstein haunts discussions of recent technologies.
In this short article, I am trying to show Frankenstein haunts discussions of recent technologies specifically human cloning. I have chosen six online research articles which are all critically annotated and relevant to the existence of Frankenstein in the recent technologies.
According to the article of “Ethics, Human Cloning, and Procreation” written by David Chan[1], human cloning has its own benefits and harms to the human. Human cloning is beneficial because it “widen the range of reproductive choices for the infertile couples and to eradicate certain diseases”. (Chan, p.3) However, some people worry human cloning will create human monsters like Frankenstein. The writer also states that human cloning are “threats to social institutions such as family and marriage, and to the value and sanctity of life.” (Chan, p.3) The clone may have psychological harm and the life of a person is not respected and valued. Moreover, human cloning brings about more benefits than the harms to the human. Since the benefits are immediate that it is new cure and helps for infertile couples. Nevertheless, disastrous consequences are predicted only and have not existed yet because it can be avoided and minimized. They are also often exaggerated. Some people doubt about whether we have the right in gene selection and both parents value a genetic link to the child. The writer points out that human cloning is twinning but not natural reproduction by giving in-vetro fertilization and test-tube babies as examples. This article is useful to illustrate the fear of the people to human cloning which may produce a human monster like Frankenstein did in the past. It also indicates the ethical problems of human cloning and some possible alternatives instead of human cloning.
With reference to the article of “FRANKENSTEIN UNBOUND? Monsters Myths and Metaphors in the Debate over Reproductive Technologies” written by Theo Vurdubakis and Brian Bloomfield[2], the writers discuss the New Productive Technology which arouse the concern of the people. People reflect on the role of technology in human affairs after the successful clone of Dolly. The writers also demonstrate that New Reproductive Technology leads to “interpretive struggle and moral controversy”. (Vurdubakis & Bloomfield, p.2) It is a continuous bio-technological revolution. As Vurdubakis and Bloomfield go on to explain, “Concepts such as ‘danger babies’ or ‘genetic engineering’, can be considered ‘monstrous’ insofar they being simultaneously to distinct and even incompatible realms of experience and systems of meaning”. (Vurdubakis & Bloomfield, p.5) New Reproductive Technology goes around a number of monstrosities such as pigs with human hearts which is physical metaphors for border displacement. Some opponents worry that it is a moral breakdown with the use of this technology. The Dolly creation shows that science fiction is true like the story of Frankenstein. Technology turns to be an autonomous force which brings about dilemma between the stance of society and the interest of individuals. The writers believe that, “moral and intellectual failure often accompanies techno-scientific success”. (Vurdubakis & Bloomfield, p.18) In this article, it reveals that Frankenstein still haunts in the discussion of New Reproductive Technology which implies that the story in the science fiction becomes true because of the technology advance. Nevertheless, people are afraid of the possibilities that some may misuse the New Reproductive Technology which creates monsters.
According to the article of “Human cloning and human dignity” written by Dieter Birnabacher[3], the writer first of all questions whose dignity is important in human reproductive cloning. He defines that “in its marginal meaning human dignity means a kind of moral status”. (Birnbacher, p.2) We cannot physically obtain it but we should have it in the society. Furthermore, the writer believes that, “The cloned child is the object of the parents’ wishes”. (Birnbacher, p.3) Because it is existed for some purposes such as saving the life of their children so their parents may particularly select a specific gene in the cloned child. The writer claims that, people have “the wish to prevent the irritation caused by the potential birth of a modern analogue of Frankenstein’s monsters”. ((Birnbacher, p.5) People believe that human cloning does not produce monster even though it highly manipulate. Scientist can distinguish the consequence of creating a monster. Since human cloning is seen as something monstrous, it seems to be objected to origin. The writer not only supports the legal ban of human cloning in the short term, but also in the long term. In this article, it indicates that human cloning bears the risk that it will create a monster although some may believe that the scientist can control themselves critically. This technology harms the human dignity to different aspects including the cloned child and the one who is being cloned.
According to the article of “The Dolly case, the Polly drug, and the mortality of human being”, written by Fermin Roland Schramm[4], he states the bio-techno scientific relevance of the Dolly fact. In the words of Schramm, “SCNT allows to expand procreative techniques in mammals and improve human reproductive health, without going through the standard fertilization procedures”. (Schramm, p.3) It helps the infertile couple to reproduce when they cannot reproduce by using traditional reproduction method. The writer claims that, “it appears unlikely that ‘cloning’ in humans will become commonplace. It is more likely that humans will continue to reproduce using the traditional method, which appears to be much more pleasurable”. (Schramm, p.5) Human cloning is an exception method for the people to reproduce unless the other reproductive methods fail. Time magazine compared Dolly case to Frankenstein. It also implies dictators will make use of the technology of human cloning to produce their clones. Moreover, the United States, England, France have different ideas on the Dolly case and mostly oppose human cloning. Two camps of polarization were formed in France after the Dolly case was exposed. In addition, there are two methods to distinguish whether human cloning is good or bad, that is good or bad in itself and good or bad to its consequences. In this article, it discusses about the recent technology, cloning of Dolly, and derives it to the safety and public perceptions on it. It points out that abuse of human cloning will result from the Frankenstein case.
According to the article of “On Replicating Persons: Ethics and the Technology of Cloning”, written by Frederick Ferre[5], he indicates the ethical problems and concerns in the technology of human cloning. “Clones are being maintained as mere organ farms, manufactured and raised for their spare parts by persons anticipating the need for transplanted hearts or kidneys, livers or lungs”. (Ferre, p.3) This arouses the ethical concern on the human cloning which sounds like a science fiction like Frankenstein. It is impossible in the past but now the technology proves that it becomes possible. Moreover, cloning is not quite new since plants can do so. The writer further indicates the human rights and ethical questions. Scientists have to go through many failures until success while reproducing human cloning. He questions how to deal with the visible human embryo during the cloning process. In this article, human cloning is relevant to the ethical problems of Frankenstein. Visible human embryo is controversial like the monster in Frankenstein.
To sum up, this webliography concentrates on the five articles about reproduction of human cloning which arouses many ethical problems and public concerns on the purpose of applications and the consequences on misusing and abusing.
[1] Chan, David, “Ethics, Human Cloning, and Procreation” <http://www.valueinquiry.net/CloningChan.pdf>, Retrieved on March 8, 2009
[2] Vurdubakis. Bloomfield. , Theo. Brian. , “FRANKENSTEIN UNBOUND? Monsters Myths and Metaphors in the Debate over Reproductive Technologies” <http://wickedness.net/Monsters/M2/vurdubakis%20paper.pdf>, Retrieved on March 8, 2009
[3] Birnbacher, Dieter, “Human cloning and dignity” <http://www.gencat.cat/salut/depsalut/pdf/di4.pdf> Nov 5 2004, Retrieved on March 8, 2009
[4] Schramm, Fermin, “The Dolly case, the Polly drug, and the mortality of human cloning” <http://www.scielosp.org/pdf/csp/v15s1/0337.pdf>, Retrieved on March 8, 2009
[5] Ferre, Frederick, “On Replicating Persons: Ethics and the Technology of Cloning” <http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/ejournals/SPT/v3n2/pdf/FERRE.PDF>, Retrieved on March 8, 2009
In this short article, I am trying to show Frankenstein haunts discussions of recent technologies specifically human cloning. I have chosen six online research articles which are all critically annotated and relevant to the existence of Frankenstein in the recent technologies.
According to the article of “Ethics, Human Cloning, and Procreation” written by David Chan[1], human cloning has its own benefits and harms to the human. Human cloning is beneficial because it “widen the range of reproductive choices for the infertile couples and to eradicate certain diseases”. (Chan, p.3) However, some people worry human cloning will create human monsters like Frankenstein. The writer also states that human cloning are “threats to social institutions such as family and marriage, and to the value and sanctity of life.” (Chan, p.3) The clone may have psychological harm and the life of a person is not respected and valued. Moreover, human cloning brings about more benefits than the harms to the human. Since the benefits are immediate that it is new cure and helps for infertile couples. Nevertheless, disastrous consequences are predicted only and have not existed yet because it can be avoided and minimized. They are also often exaggerated. Some people doubt about whether we have the right in gene selection and both parents value a genetic link to the child. The writer points out that human cloning is twinning but not natural reproduction by giving in-vetro fertilization and test-tube babies as examples. This article is useful to illustrate the fear of the people to human cloning which may produce a human monster like Frankenstein did in the past. It also indicates the ethical problems of human cloning and some possible alternatives instead of human cloning.
With reference to the article of “FRANKENSTEIN UNBOUND? Monsters Myths and Metaphors in the Debate over Reproductive Technologies” written by Theo Vurdubakis and Brian Bloomfield[2], the writers discuss the New Productive Technology which arouse the concern of the people. People reflect on the role of technology in human affairs after the successful clone of Dolly. The writers also demonstrate that New Reproductive Technology leads to “interpretive struggle and moral controversy”. (Vurdubakis & Bloomfield, p.2) It is a continuous bio-technological revolution. As Vurdubakis and Bloomfield go on to explain, “Concepts such as ‘danger babies’ or ‘genetic engineering’, can be considered ‘monstrous’ insofar they being simultaneously to distinct and even incompatible realms of experience and systems of meaning”. (Vurdubakis & Bloomfield, p.5) New Reproductive Technology goes around a number of monstrosities such as pigs with human hearts which is physical metaphors for border displacement. Some opponents worry that it is a moral breakdown with the use of this technology. The Dolly creation shows that science fiction is true like the story of Frankenstein. Technology turns to be an autonomous force which brings about dilemma between the stance of society and the interest of individuals. The writers believe that, “moral and intellectual failure often accompanies techno-scientific success”. (Vurdubakis & Bloomfield, p.18) In this article, it reveals that Frankenstein still haunts in the discussion of New Reproductive Technology which implies that the story in the science fiction becomes true because of the technology advance. Nevertheless, people are afraid of the possibilities that some may misuse the New Reproductive Technology which creates monsters.
According to the article of “Human cloning and human dignity” written by Dieter Birnabacher[3], the writer first of all questions whose dignity is important in human reproductive cloning. He defines that “in its marginal meaning human dignity means a kind of moral status”. (Birnbacher, p.2) We cannot physically obtain it but we should have it in the society. Furthermore, the writer believes that, “The cloned child is the object of the parents’ wishes”. (Birnbacher, p.3) Because it is existed for some purposes such as saving the life of their children so their parents may particularly select a specific gene in the cloned child. The writer claims that, people have “the wish to prevent the irritation caused by the potential birth of a modern analogue of Frankenstein’s monsters”. ((Birnbacher, p.5) People believe that human cloning does not produce monster even though it highly manipulate. Scientist can distinguish the consequence of creating a monster. Since human cloning is seen as something monstrous, it seems to be objected to origin. The writer not only supports the legal ban of human cloning in the short term, but also in the long term. In this article, it indicates that human cloning bears the risk that it will create a monster although some may believe that the scientist can control themselves critically. This technology harms the human dignity to different aspects including the cloned child and the one who is being cloned.
According to the article of “The Dolly case, the Polly drug, and the mortality of human being”, written by Fermin Roland Schramm[4], he states the bio-techno scientific relevance of the Dolly fact. In the words of Schramm, “SCNT allows to expand procreative techniques in mammals and improve human reproductive health, without going through the standard fertilization procedures”. (Schramm, p.3) It helps the infertile couple to reproduce when they cannot reproduce by using traditional reproduction method. The writer claims that, “it appears unlikely that ‘cloning’ in humans will become commonplace. It is more likely that humans will continue to reproduce using the traditional method, which appears to be much more pleasurable”. (Schramm, p.5) Human cloning is an exception method for the people to reproduce unless the other reproductive methods fail. Time magazine compared Dolly case to Frankenstein. It also implies dictators will make use of the technology of human cloning to produce their clones. Moreover, the United States, England, France have different ideas on the Dolly case and mostly oppose human cloning. Two camps of polarization were formed in France after the Dolly case was exposed. In addition, there are two methods to distinguish whether human cloning is good or bad, that is good or bad in itself and good or bad to its consequences. In this article, it discusses about the recent technology, cloning of Dolly, and derives it to the safety and public perceptions on it. It points out that abuse of human cloning will result from the Frankenstein case.
According to the article of “On Replicating Persons: Ethics and the Technology of Cloning”, written by Frederick Ferre[5], he indicates the ethical problems and concerns in the technology of human cloning. “Clones are being maintained as mere organ farms, manufactured and raised for their spare parts by persons anticipating the need for transplanted hearts or kidneys, livers or lungs”. (Ferre, p.3) This arouses the ethical concern on the human cloning which sounds like a science fiction like Frankenstein. It is impossible in the past but now the technology proves that it becomes possible. Moreover, cloning is not quite new since plants can do so. The writer further indicates the human rights and ethical questions. Scientists have to go through many failures until success while reproducing human cloning. He questions how to deal with the visible human embryo during the cloning process. In this article, human cloning is relevant to the ethical problems of Frankenstein. Visible human embryo is controversial like the monster in Frankenstein.
To sum up, this webliography concentrates on the five articles about reproduction of human cloning which arouses many ethical problems and public concerns on the purpose of applications and the consequences on misusing and abusing.
[1] Chan, David, “Ethics, Human Cloning, and Procreation” <http://www.valueinquiry.net/CloningChan.pdf>, Retrieved on March 8, 2009
[2] Vurdubakis. Bloomfield. , Theo. Brian. , “FRANKENSTEIN UNBOUND? Monsters Myths and Metaphors in the Debate over Reproductive Technologies” <http://wickedness.net/Monsters/M2/vurdubakis%20paper.pdf>, Retrieved on March 8, 2009
[3] Birnbacher, Dieter, “Human cloning and dignity” <http://www.gencat.cat/salut/depsalut/pdf/di4.pdf> Nov 5 2004, Retrieved on March 8, 2009
[4] Schramm, Fermin, “The Dolly case, the Polly drug, and the mortality of human cloning” <http://www.scielosp.org/pdf/csp/v15s1/0337.pdf>, Retrieved on March 8, 2009
[5] Ferre, Frederick, “On Replicating Persons: Ethics and the Technology of Cloning” <http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/ejournals/SPT/v3n2/pdf/FERRE.PDF>, Retrieved on March 8, 2009
Introduction
Hello , everyone. My name is Ng Yuk Wah, Eva. Similar to some of you, I studied Associate of Arts(Media and Cultural Studies) in SPACE and chose to study this course in order to get a degree for better career prospect.
Tonkichi in Causeway Bay
Lobby Lounge in Prince Hotel 
AL CID
I have 1 sister and 1 brother in my family and I 'm the second. I live in Tseung Kwan O so I always take MTR.
I love hunting for food in my leisure time. Let me share some of it to you guys.
Tonkichi in Causeway Bay
Lobby Lounge in Prince HotelAL CID
Other than that, I love playing badminton, reading, sport climbing, watching TV and surfing in the internet. I played the game of "Bubble Town" in facebook before and recently I 'm playing the game, "Pet Society" in facebook.
It's time to stop now. Hope you enjoy your school life in CIDP or Perth. Welcome to chat with me, I'm glad to know more about you in these two years.
Cheers,
Eva ^_^
Tuesday, March 10, 2009
Self-feedback of the oral presentation - Sophie
I have almost forgotten to post a comment here. To those who've reminded me, thank you.
After my reflective thinking, I realised that I could have done better in my many ways. I admit that I failed to provide examples illustrated by Alison Adam. Though 3 minutes aren't enough, what I should do is to make a long story short to allow audience understand better.
Surely the overall improvement will be there if I prepare better next time. I hope I can be in a better shape so that I can really throw my voice and stretch myself further.
After my reflective thinking, I realised that I could have done better in my many ways. I admit that I failed to provide examples illustrated by Alison Adam. Though 3 minutes aren't enough, what I should do is to make a long story short to allow audience understand better.
Surely the overall improvement will be there if I prepare better next time. I hope I can be in a better shape so that I can really throw my voice and stretch myself further.
Presentation outline for Chris Mung Pak Yu
My reading is " Ruminations on Cyber-Race" by Jerry Kang.
I will present the general ideaof the readings base on the theory of Race, the role of cyberspace with people and the abolition and integration.
Moreover, i will talk about the transmutation, which means the cyber passing method.
Looking forward to the presentation
I will present the general ideaof the readings base on the theory of Race, the role of cyberspace with people and the abolition and integration.
Moreover, i will talk about the transmutation, which means the cyber passing method.
Looking forward to the presentation
Outline of Presentation by JASON
Hong Kong Cyber culture: A Case Study by Amy Lai
Using an English Language community website as an example --- ICERED
ICERED
- Launched in Hong Kong in March 2000
- Target users is the working professional in the city
- Example to examine HK cyber culture
- Discussion in the broader context of cyber democracy
-
II. “Your English Sucks”
Class discriminations in the Internet (ICERED)
- 1. University Banding
- 2. College Teaching
- 3. Banking
- 4. Level of English
à Discriminate those who are the lower class, on the other hand, promote the higher class and celebrate them.
III. The Unbearable “White-ness” of ICERED
Battle of different races
- Most of people called Internet a “Radicalized” place
à Criticized the color-blindness
à Dominated by whites
IV. “Men are after sex, women after money”
Hong Kong Man
- Sex-oriented
- Car
- How much they earn
Hong Kong Woman
- Unintelligent
- Bad-looking
- Money-mined
- Lowest IQ in Asia
à No limitation as to how people might describe themselves in cyber space.
V. Homophobia and Queerness
Homosexual discussion in ICERED is accept
- Western people’s mind
- Respect homophobia
However, discussion homophobia in Hong Kong is prohibited
- Not open-minded
- Believed natural value
- Respect Family
- Example for children
à ICERED as a discussion panel online is allowed different voice in the cyber world. à Internet fails to become the equivalent of a public sphere.
VI. “Who wanna be superstars?”
“Party Animal of Hong Kong” of Lynne Lee on ICERED
- Rude and obscene comments
- Appearance can replace the real in virtual space
à Chat Room Culture
- Chat room identities which are continuously invented and forever changeable
Monday, March 9, 2009
outlines of my presentation - KC Luk
the readings topic i was assigned is Menu-Driven Identities: Making Race Happen Online by Lisa Nakamura in her work Cybertypes.
the reading discussed some issues about the 'appearing' of the race of the users of the internet.
it demonstrated with different valid examples such as website, and gave some detailed description of how people's race will be shown in the web.
moreover, it explored the purpose of some forwarding e-mails.
in addition, it have mentioned some issues about those ethnic websites
more details will be given out in my presentation.
the reading discussed some issues about the 'appearing' of the race of the users of the internet.
it demonstrated with different valid examples such as website, and gave some detailed description of how people's race will be shown in the web.
moreover, it explored the purpose of some forwarding e-mails.
in addition, it have mentioned some issues about those ethnic websites
more details will be given out in my presentation.
Critical Annotated Webliography by YU WING HO, NIK
3.Frankenstein continues to occupy the popular imagination as a monstrous scientist. Analyze some of the ways in which Frankenstein haunts discussions of recent technologies.
Nik Yu
Nowadays, people are living surrounded by technology. We all are taking benefit of technology in everyday life, on the other hand, we still fear of the technology as we think one day it may lose control and become too powerful. Frankenstein is one of the earliest popular imaginations coming from the fear of the technology. In order to analyzing if this popular imagination still haunt discussions of recent technologies. I use search engines such as Google, particularly Google Scholar. I found many articles in regard to Frankenstein and Technology. From among them I choose the most related scholar articles about the discussion of recent technologies.
Frankenstein Complex
In Orlin Damyanov’s article, Technology and its dangerous effects on nature and human life as perceived in Mary Shelley's Frankenstein and William Gibson's Neuromancer, [1] Orlin compared two fictions, Frankenstein, written by Mary Shelley’s and Neuromancer, writer by William Gibson to show how the technology invention impact our society and our life. Firstly, Damyanoy analyzed how the history and the technology background of the story influence the plot itself in each fiction. Also Damyanoy pointed out that even two stories were from different history background, he still thought that sciences and technologies were the basic elements of the transformations in the structure of our world. “Would be the science and technology referred to in Shelley's Frankenstein or the powerful information and computer technologies implied in Gibson's Neuromancer, the underlying idea is the same - profound change and transformation in every aspect of human life is imminent, to such extent that life itself is being transformed.” (Damyanoy, 1996) Also he pointed out that the danger of the technology was our reliance on it and its equivocal inventions. “It is this unambiguous danger to our human community that is hidden in our reliance on technology and its equivocal inventions that these two works”. (Damyanoy, 1996) At the end of the articles, Damyanoy warned us to think about how technology influencing our life by asking us “science and technology are really going to improve the world, will new technologies really improve human communication, or inadvertently make it more difficult? Will our lives be better?” (Damyanoy, 1996)
Frankenstein Complex: The Education towards Technologies
In Shari Popen’s article, Thinking Through Technology: Frankenstein’s Problem, [2] the author mainly criticized if technologies influenced our society and our life in a good way or in a bad way. Analyzing her article, we could see that she thought the danger of using technology was we, human, the creator of the technology, paid little concern for what we created, like Frankenstein in the Mary Sheelley’s fiction. She thought as a creator of the technology, we also became an educator, we should have tried our best to include our technology in the dynamic and changing human community. As what she said in her article, “Mary Shelley’s gothic tale contains a modern parable about our ambiguous relationship to technological creation and power.” At the end of the articles, Popen pointed out that, Frankenstein actually called us to recognize the humanity in our own constructions. Also she thought “the real master in Frankenstein is neither Frankenstein nor the “Monster” but the logic or state of mind that permits these acts, that produces and reproduces them.”
In Alias Burns articles, Frankenstein of the future, [3] Burns’ view is actually similar to Popen’s, She pointed out that as a creator of the technology, we should take our responsibility to parent of these potentially dangerous “children”. As she thought technology maybe powerful enough to take control or destroy the society of the human begins, just like Frankenstein.
Frankenstein Complex :From Transhumanism to Morality
In Francis Fukuyama’s articles, The World’s Most Dangerous Ideas: Transhumanism, [4] Fukuyama thought transhumanism is one of the most dangerous ideas in the world. Fukuyama did not think that transhumanism would make us, smarter, less prone to violence’s and so on. Also he through this technology was quite dangerous to our society as the moral or intellectual threat they represent were not always easy to identify. He also pointed out that the human always looked for the better life so that sometimes we would ignore the moral cost, which is very dangerous for human begin. In the latter part of his articles, he questioned if some transhumanism’s advocates understand the ultimate human goods. He thought we were “miraculously complex products of a long evolutionary process, products whose whole is much more than the sum of our parts.” Therefore, he thought transhumanism is one of the most dangerous in our life as there were many uncertainties of this technology also it now had already threatened our moral standard.
Opposition of Frankenstein Complex
In Lee McCauley article, Countering the Frankenstein Complex, [5] McCauley mainly explained the concept of “ The Frankenstein Complex” and he used some Hollywood movies to showed that how people fear the uncertainty of using the technology. However, McCauley actually was quite positive towards the technological impact towards our society. In the first part of his article, he pointed out the science and the technology capture the imagination of the general, which engendered fear and skepticism. “At 50 years old, the fields of artificial intelligence and robotics capture the imagination of the general public while, at the same time, engendering a great deal of fear and skepticism.” (McCauley) Then he explained the phenomenon of Frankenstein Complex by some old fictions, such as Rossum’s Universal Robots, written by a Czech Author, Karel Capek. Also, he pointed out that Frankenstein’s could more acutely show the notion that technology produce something that could not control and explored. Beside, he also pointed our that Frankenstein complex is still alive and well in our society as many Hollywood movies, such as, Terminator (I, II, III), I. Robot, Artificial Intelligence, and so on, still present the love and hate between robots and human, also showed us the fear of uncertainty of using the technology. In the next part of the article, he used some academic to show that how the human being fear the technology, mainly focus on people thinking robots could replace us. At the end of the articles, McCauley gave three reasons to argue Frankenstein Complex. Firstly, he thought there are not many high intelligent level robot, which could evoke the evolution to against the human. Next, he showed that the birth rate of human being is much more higher than the machine. Also, he does not agree robots itself could reproduce at this moment as they are not powerful or knowledgeable enough. Last but not least, he thought should be test for many times before it came out so it could also reduced the possibility of the evolution robots. Finally McCauley thought the human race still could destroy itself, but sure not through technology.
To conclude, nowadays, we cannot doubt that we can live without technology and we know that the power of the technology would be stronger and stronger. However, we should try to get more understanding on what technology we are using and how it impacts our life in a good way and bad way.
References
Alisa Burns. "Frankenstein of the Future." . October. 2002. . 04 March. 2008
Francis Fukuyama. "The World's Most Dangerous Ideas." . 01 September. 2004. . 04 March. 2008
Lee McCauley . "Countering the Frankenstein Complex." . . University of Memphis . 04 March. 2008
Orlin Damyanov. "Technology and its dangerous effects on nature and human life as perceived in Mary Shelley's Frankenstein and William Gibson's Neuromancer." . 1996. . 04 March. 2008
Shari Popen. "Thinking Through Technology: Frankenstein’s Problem." . 1998. North American Association for Community of Inquiry. 04 March. 2008
SOMETHING ABOUT NIK
INTRODUCTION? Set.NETI really have no idea how to describe myself here. Also, it's been ages since i last did an introduction in written form. Anyway let me try.
I'm 21, still 21. however, i think i've done too much in certain aspects. i am learning how to be a good son and a good boyfriend everyday, but i never try to be a good guy. i think it's bit meaningless to be a good guy, as i believe, most of the time, nobody would appreciate it if you're too good. even i never try to be a good guy, i am still not a bad guy. at least i never mean to hurt others. if i really hurt anybody, i mean to apologize here. however, even i mean to do it.. i think i am still too mean.
Beside being mean, i mean to be lazy. I just dunno why i could that lazy all the time. i always try to do assignments before the deadline, yet... deadline is my only driving force.
I think i am a very lucky guy, esp after 18. my life sometimes is just too smooth and i am just spoiled by my family and friends. I've got some part times jobs since i was 16. most of the jobs were bit HEA.... and i seldom found it's difficult to make money. I was a tutor when i was 16-19. I've worked in a Photography studio for three yrs and have worked in an NGO for six months. i worked in PCCW as a fix-line content management coordinator when i was 20. Actually just went to do sounds recording, photo editing and content managing and so on.
I have no interests, but usually i spend most of my time with my family, gf, work, school and gym. I travel sometimes, i've been taiwan for five times, thailand for four times, Shanghai, Beijing, KL, Japan, Australia, France, Ireland, Italy, Switzerland and UK./ Actually I still think HK is the best.
Critical Annotated Webliography by Allan Wong
Question 3 - Frankenstein
Through the intensive search of relevant articles/journals on the internet, I found some articles might be useful in answering the question of analyzing some of the ways in which Frankenstein haunts discussion of recent technologies. I find that the major concern of current technologies relating to the fear of Frankenstein is about the new reproductive technologies, such as in vitro fertilization (IVF), cloning and etc. The following are my findings.
1. In the article “Curse of Frankenstein” written by Jon Turney, he stated that we are less “able to escape the shadow of a fictional monster” (Turney, par. 1), Frankenstein when our technology become more advance. He uses the monstrous figure of Frankenstein to relate to the current biotechnology and explained why we still fear of the story, which is because the power over the body it the power we most desired and most feared, and “is now ours for the asking” (Turney, par. 12). He also stated that the myth of Frankenstein cannot help in deciding to deal with the current life science and technology. “What we need are ways of choosing which science to promote, which to curb” (Turney, par. 14). This article is helpful in answering the guiding question, for it has discussed how much we wanted to control the body and the fear of the monstrosity we may have created by manipulating such technology over the course of the history of biotechnology. It also gives me a general idea of how Frankenstein is linked to the new reproductive technologies.
2. In the editorial “Letters to Dr. Frankenstein? Ethics and the new reproductive technologies” by Henk Ten Have, it introduces some of the new reproductive technologies, such as IVF, GIFT and ZIFT. Also, it uses a large proportion of the writing to discuss the ethical issues of manipulating such technologies, mainly IVF. The author discusses deeply about whether the use of IVF to help the infertility to have children is valid or not, because each technology needs scientific assessment before it is allowed to proliferate. However, IVF is not justified by its scientific assessment. This article is largely focus on the moral issues about the new reproductive technologies with little mention about the fear of the figure of Frankenstein. However, I think it is still useful in answering the guiding question for it provides a detailed debate on whether using IVF is valid or not, and the new reproductive technologies are actually very similar to the tale of Frankenstein and the debate of IVF is linked closely to the fear of Frankenstein. Also, it provides an in-depth look on how we think about IVF.
3. In the essay “The curse of Frankenstein: Visions of technology and society in the debate over new reproductive technologies” by Brian P. Bloomfield and Theo Vurdubakis, it also talks about the debate of the new reproductive technologies, such as cloning and designer baby. The essay gives us a general history of the new reproductive technologies, from cloning case of ‘Dolly’, ‘Polly’ and the first human clone ‘Eve’ to the designer baby ‘Adam’. This essay lead us from case to case of the controversies about the use of the new reproductive technologies. The authors will discuss the issues of each case and also quoting other scholars’ thinking for more discussion on an issue. This essay is also useful in answering the guiding question, because it gave me the views that the aforementioned articles lack of, such as the case of cloning and designer baby. It tells us how we fear the possible consequences of manipulating the new reproductive technologies and the continuous debate about such issues in a broader view.
4. It the article of “The creation lottery: final lessons from natural reproduction: Why those who accept natural reproduction should accept cloning and other Frankenstein reproductive technologies” by Julian Savulescu and John Harris, it gives us an interesting view that it takes a position on pro-Frankenstein reproductive technologies, which is opposite to the previous articles. The argument of this article is that the artificial reproduction method is able to reduce the loss rate of embryos and reduce the possibilities of having a genetically abnormal child, while the natural reproduction method is not able to do that. Also, they stated that it would be our obligation to have a healthier child and reduce the death rate of embryos if those new reproduction technologies, such as cloning, IVF, etc. are able achieve these goals. I think this article is quite useful in answering the guiding question, because it provides a counterargument for the debate on the controversial new reproduction technologies. The views of this article and broaden the view of my answer to the question.
5. In the article of “Re-engineering the human: New reproductive technologies and the specter of Frankenstein” by Brian P. Bloomfield and Theo Vurdubakis, it follows a similar plot of the aforementioned article that is written by the same authors. It also uses cases of new reproductive technologies to illustrate their view upon the use of these technologies. The article quoted a lot from the news coverage and scholars, which could give us how the media and the experts respond to such events. Also, the quotation helped the authors on explaining their views on the new reproductive technologies. In my point of view, this article is just fairly helpful on answering the guiding question. It is not because the arguments and information in it is not rich enough, but it quite similar to the previous article by the same writers, which means that it, is not able to provide me more views and arguments on this issue as compared to the others.
In conclusion, the concern about the new reproductive technologies seems to be overwhelming. According to my search result, a large proportion of the results are about this issue. So, I decided to focus on the debate of the new reproductive technologies rather than the other topics. In my opinion, the fear of the new reproductive technologies is quite similar to the fear of Frankenstein. It is because, in the process of cloning and making designer baby is actually put us in the position of modern Prometheus which match with the subtitle of the Frankenstein novel. As we still not able to understand fully about manipulating the power over the body, the debate about the new reproductive technologies will continue and the shadow of Frankenstein will not disappeared any time soon.
1. Bloomfield, Brian, Theo Vurdubakis, “Re-Engineering the Human: New Reproductive Technologies and the Specter of Frankenstein”, 2006, retrieved on 5 March 2009.
2. Bloomfield, Brian, Theo Vurdubakis, “The Curse Of Frankenstein: Visions of Technology and Society in the Debate over New Reproductive Technologies”
3. Have, Henk Ten, “Letters to Dr. Frankenstein? Ethics and the New Reproductive Technologies”, 1995, retrieved on 5 March 2009.
4. Savulescu, Julian, John Harris, “The Creation Lottery: Final Lessons from Natural Reproduction: Why Those Who Accept Natural Reproduction Should Accept Cloning and Other Frankenstein Reproductive Technologies”, retrieved on 5 March 2009.
5. Turney, Jon, “Curse of Frankenstein”, 3 April 1998, retrieved on 5 March 2009.
Through the intensive search of relevant articles/journals on the internet, I found some articles might be useful in answering the question of analyzing some of the ways in which Frankenstein haunts discussion of recent technologies. I find that the major concern of current technologies relating to the fear of Frankenstein is about the new reproductive technologies, such as in vitro fertilization (IVF), cloning and etc. The following are my findings.
1. In the article “Curse of Frankenstein” written by Jon Turney, he stated that we are less “able to escape the shadow of a fictional monster” (Turney, par. 1), Frankenstein when our technology become more advance. He uses the monstrous figure of Frankenstein to relate to the current biotechnology and explained why we still fear of the story, which is because the power over the body it the power we most desired and most feared, and “is now ours for the asking” (Turney, par. 12). He also stated that the myth of Frankenstein cannot help in deciding to deal with the current life science and technology. “What we need are ways of choosing which science to promote, which to curb” (Turney, par. 14). This article is helpful in answering the guiding question, for it has discussed how much we wanted to control the body and the fear of the monstrosity we may have created by manipulating such technology over the course of the history of biotechnology. It also gives me a general idea of how Frankenstein is linked to the new reproductive technologies.
2. In the editorial “Letters to Dr. Frankenstein? Ethics and the new reproductive technologies” by Henk Ten Have, it introduces some of the new reproductive technologies, such as IVF, GIFT and ZIFT. Also, it uses a large proportion of the writing to discuss the ethical issues of manipulating such technologies, mainly IVF. The author discusses deeply about whether the use of IVF to help the infertility to have children is valid or not, because each technology needs scientific assessment before it is allowed to proliferate. However, IVF is not justified by its scientific assessment. This article is largely focus on the moral issues about the new reproductive technologies with little mention about the fear of the figure of Frankenstein. However, I think it is still useful in answering the guiding question for it provides a detailed debate on whether using IVF is valid or not, and the new reproductive technologies are actually very similar to the tale of Frankenstein and the debate of IVF is linked closely to the fear of Frankenstein. Also, it provides an in-depth look on how we think about IVF.
3. In the essay “The curse of Frankenstein: Visions of technology and society in the debate over new reproductive technologies” by Brian P. Bloomfield and Theo Vurdubakis, it also talks about the debate of the new reproductive technologies, such as cloning and designer baby. The essay gives us a general history of the new reproductive technologies, from cloning case of ‘Dolly’, ‘Polly’ and the first human clone ‘Eve’ to the designer baby ‘Adam’. This essay lead us from case to case of the controversies about the use of the new reproductive technologies. The authors will discuss the issues of each case and also quoting other scholars’ thinking for more discussion on an issue. This essay is also useful in answering the guiding question, because it gave me the views that the aforementioned articles lack of, such as the case of cloning and designer baby. It tells us how we fear the possible consequences of manipulating the new reproductive technologies and the continuous debate about such issues in a broader view.
4. It the article of “The creation lottery: final lessons from natural reproduction: Why those who accept natural reproduction should accept cloning and other Frankenstein reproductive technologies” by Julian Savulescu and John Harris, it gives us an interesting view that it takes a position on pro-Frankenstein reproductive technologies, which is opposite to the previous articles. The argument of this article is that the artificial reproduction method is able to reduce the loss rate of embryos and reduce the possibilities of having a genetically abnormal child, while the natural reproduction method is not able to do that. Also, they stated that it would be our obligation to have a healthier child and reduce the death rate of embryos if those new reproduction technologies, such as cloning, IVF, etc. are able achieve these goals. I think this article is quite useful in answering the guiding question, because it provides a counterargument for the debate on the controversial new reproduction technologies. The views of this article and broaden the view of my answer to the question.
5. In the article of “Re-engineering the human: New reproductive technologies and the specter of Frankenstein” by Brian P. Bloomfield and Theo Vurdubakis, it follows a similar plot of the aforementioned article that is written by the same authors. It also uses cases of new reproductive technologies to illustrate their view upon the use of these technologies. The article quoted a lot from the news coverage and scholars, which could give us how the media and the experts respond to such events. Also, the quotation helped the authors on explaining their views on the new reproductive technologies. In my point of view, this article is just fairly helpful on answering the guiding question. It is not because the arguments and information in it is not rich enough, but it quite similar to the previous article by the same writers, which means that it, is not able to provide me more views and arguments on this issue as compared to the others.
In conclusion, the concern about the new reproductive technologies seems to be overwhelming. According to my search result, a large proportion of the results are about this issue. So, I decided to focus on the debate of the new reproductive technologies rather than the other topics. In my opinion, the fear of the new reproductive technologies is quite similar to the fear of Frankenstein. It is because, in the process of cloning and making designer baby is actually put us in the position of modern Prometheus which match with the subtitle of the Frankenstein novel. As we still not able to understand fully about manipulating the power over the body, the debate about the new reproductive technologies will continue and the shadow of Frankenstein will not disappeared any time soon.
1. Bloomfield, Brian, Theo Vurdubakis, “Re-Engineering the Human: New Reproductive Technologies and the Specter of Frankenstein”
2. Bloomfield, Brian, Theo Vurdubakis, “The Curse Of Frankenstein: Visions of Technology and Society in the Debate over New Reproductive Technologies”
3. Have, Henk Ten, “Letters to Dr. Frankenstein? Ethics and the New Reproductive Technologies”
4. Savulescu, Julian, John Harris, “The Creation Lottery: Final Lessons from Natural Reproduction: Why Those Who Accept Natural Reproduction Should Accept Cloning and Other Frankenstein Reproductive Technologies”
5. Turney, Jon, “Curse of Frankenstein”
Critical Annotated Webliography by Chris Mung Pak YU
Introduction
Nowadays, technology developed to a stage that out of our imagination. Especially internet growth, the popularity is keep rising, more and more people have their own computer and can be linked to the internet. They are able to connect to the world and communicate with the others through the internet. With no doubt, technology changes our way of living and influence the world a lot in different aspects.
Cyborg in medical
Cyborg helps human a lot in medical aspect and somehow, blur the boundary of human and robot. In the old days if someone got sick, there was not much choice to cure. However, technology allows us to invent many new skills and medical technology to cure a human body. Like new medicine, for cancer, new artificial body part for people that need a substitute body part to help us in their life. “Many of these technologies were created to restore abilities that were lost to injury, disease, and age. Limb prostheses help to maintain movement and normal function even if a limb is lost, glasses help to correct failing eyesight, and ear horns assist individuals that are hard of hearing. These technologies were the precursors before the cyborg revolution in medicine. Much of the old technologies were an external extension of the human body. Although these devices assisted the individual in one way, the machines could also become a hindrance to the user” [1](Samuel Dokko). Moreover, technology is in a stage that we can creates internal human organs and materials that helps people with internal organ crock up or malfunction. Like liver cancer, kidney disease or heart disease. We have also invented different kinds of micro robot to do surgery that human hand cannot perform. “One of the most commonly used restorative technologies in patients is an artificial organ. For many scientists and medical professionals, creating an artificial organ that is equal to that of the original has become a dreamful obsession. Another driving factor to create artificial organs is the need for technologies that could replace traditional organ transplantations”[2](Samuel Dokko). However, after transplant an artificial body part or internal organ, is that human a human or cyborg? Because our body contain piece of organ and material that is not born naturally and is not organic, so does that consider as a human or cyborg?
Figure of cyborg
How cyborg being define? Is it just a concept in web? Or is really happening around us, as some of us had become cyborg by different reasons. There’re a lot of impact on the definition of human being, social activities and development of human history. Moreover it also brings us new kind of culture like cyberpunk in our new generation, does this kind of culture affect and changes our life continuously? “The figure of the cyborg is at root a spatial metaphor. But how does the idea of the cyborg intersect with spatial theory? In what ways does the cyborg reinforce or contradict other emerging strands of urban thought that also emphasize urban complexity and hybridity? Has the epistemological subtlety and political prescience of the cyborg, as originally formulated in the 1980s, been realized in practice or simply been diffused through the term’s widening usage? And should we ultimately reject the idea of the cyborg as an anachronism derived from cold war science and the first generation of twentieth-century cyberpunk culture?”[3](MATTHEW GANDY)
Cyberpunk and science fiction
Nowadays cyberpunk is a kind of new culture within science fiction and is generate by cyborg. How this culture affect the ordinary science fiction genre in our culture can be explained in this article. “If the investigation of our relationship to science and technology is the definitive feature of science fiction, then the exploration of human couplings with a particular type of technology constitutes a broad categorization of cyberpunk fiction. Cyberpunk, a subgenre of science fiction which emerged in the 1980s, is particularly concerned with exploring the effects of "cyborg technologies" on late twentieth-century culture. Cyberpunk is differentiated from the more mainstream science fiction literature by three central themes which illuminate the role of technology in society: futurology, techno-paradigms, and the cyborg presence” [4](Lauraine Leblanc)
Cyborg and feminism
This can help us have a clear sense about the impact of cyborg on feminism movement. The existence of cyborg brought a huge impact on the idea of feminism, because cyborg is somehow neutral gendered. There are a lot to concern within such circumstances. “A cyborg is a cybernetic organism, a hybrid of machine and organism, a creature of social reality as well as a creature of fiction. Social reality is lived social relations, our most important political construction, and a world-changing fiction. The international women’s movements have constructed “women’s experience,” as well as uncovered or discovered this crucial collective object.”[5] (Steven Seidman)
Cyborg and human self
Since the existence of cyborg, we have been questioning ourselves the boundary between human and cyborg. In this book, they have strong argument on such question; whether we are human or not a human since our ancestor know how to use different tools to live our life. “It picked up speed when our more recent forebears began to wire up telegraph, telephone... It is repeated whenever a child learns to do these things; for the cyborg, ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny. It is not that we have become posthuman in the wireless network era; since Neanderthal early- adopters first picked up sticks and stones, we have never been human.”[6] (William J. Mitchell)
There are still lots of argument in cyborg and human aspects, but I believe one day we will agree that we are all cyborg, because we certainly will be linked up by technology and network connection. We cannot get rid of that happen.
Footnotes:
[1]Samuel Dokko,“Cyborg Bodies in Medicine 2007” 1 March 2009 <http://www.cyborgdb.org/dokko.htm>
[2] Samuel Dokko,“Cyborg Bodies in Medicine 2007” 1 March 2009 <http://www.cyborgdb.org/dokko.htm>
[3] MATTHEW GANDY, International Journal of Urban and Regional Research “Cyborg Urbanization:Complexity and Monstrosity in the Contemporary City” Volume 29.1, March 2005 P 26–49 , 1 March 2009
<http://www.geog.ucl.ac.uk:8080/print-version/about-the-department/people/academics/matthew-gandy/files/pdf1.pdf>
[4] Lauraine Leblanc, “Razor girls: Genre and Gender in Cyberpunk Fiction” 2003 , 1 March 2009<http://project.cyberpunk.ru/idb/genre_and_gender_in_cyberpunk_fiction.html>
[5] Steven Seidman, “The Postmodern Turn: New perspectives on social theory” 1994 1 March 2009<http://books.google.com/books?hl=zh-TW&lr=&id=bcfEK-owDrwC&oi=fnd&pg=PA82&dq=cyborg&ots=mfT7guw-wO&sig=MiA3of1-MlOjUTvy0GKIGPWuBEY#PPP9,M1>
[6] William J. Mitchell, “Me++: The Cyborg Self and the Networked City MIT” 2004 p.169, 1 March 2009 <http://books.google.com/books?hl=zh-TW&lr=&id=wcBo7pq3X1AC&oi=fnd&pg=PA1&dq=cyborg&ots=Xoc2PmmPkt&sig=HN50UfldDRR4E5u6_i4xAP_3Qmw#PPP1,M1>
Bliography:
Lauraine Leblanc, “Razor girls: Genre and Gender in Cyberpunk Fiction” 2003 1 March 2009
<http://project.cyberpunk.ru/idb/genre_and_gender_in_cyberpunk_fiction.html>
MATTHEW GANDY, International Journal of Urban and Regional Research
“Cyborg Urbanization: Complexity and Monstrosity in the Contemporary City” Volume 29.1, March 2005 P 26–49 , 1 March 2009
<http://www.geog.ucl.ac.uk:8080/print-version/about-the-department/people/academics/matthew-gandy/files/pdf1.pdf>
Steven Seidman, “The Postmodern Turn: New perspectives on social theory” Cambridge University Press, 1994 1 March 2009
<http://books.google.com/books?hl=zh-TW&lr=&id=bcfEK-owDrwC&oi=fnd&pg=PA82&dq=cyborg&ots=mfT7guw-wO&sig=MiA3of1-MlOjUTvy0GKIGPWuBEY#PPP9,M1>
Samuel Dokko, “Cyborg Bodies in Medicine 2007” 1 March 2009 “http://www.cyborgdb.org/dokko.htm”
William J. Mitchell, “Me++: The Cyborg Self and the Networked City MIT” Press, 2004 1 March 2009<http://books.google.com/books?hl=zh-TW&lr=&id=wcBo7pq3X1AC&oi=fnd&pg=PA1&dq=cyborg&ots=Xoc2PmmPkt&sig=HN50UfldDRR4E5u6_i4xAP_3Qmw#PPP1,M1>
Nowadays, technology developed to a stage that out of our imagination. Especially internet growth, the popularity is keep rising, more and more people have their own computer and can be linked to the internet. They are able to connect to the world and communicate with the others through the internet. With no doubt, technology changes our way of living and influence the world a lot in different aspects.
Cyborg in medical
Cyborg helps human a lot in medical aspect and somehow, blur the boundary of human and robot. In the old days if someone got sick, there was not much choice to cure. However, technology allows us to invent many new skills and medical technology to cure a human body. Like new medicine, for cancer, new artificial body part for people that need a substitute body part to help us in their life. “Many of these technologies were created to restore abilities that were lost to injury, disease, and age. Limb prostheses help to maintain movement and normal function even if a limb is lost, glasses help to correct failing eyesight, and ear horns assist individuals that are hard of hearing. These technologies were the precursors before the cyborg revolution in medicine. Much of the old technologies were an external extension of the human body. Although these devices assisted the individual in one way, the machines could also become a hindrance to the user” [1](Samuel Dokko). Moreover, technology is in a stage that we can creates internal human organs and materials that helps people with internal organ crock up or malfunction. Like liver cancer, kidney disease or heart disease. We have also invented different kinds of micro robot to do surgery that human hand cannot perform. “One of the most commonly used restorative technologies in patients is an artificial organ. For many scientists and medical professionals, creating an artificial organ that is equal to that of the original has become a dreamful obsession. Another driving factor to create artificial organs is the need for technologies that could replace traditional organ transplantations”[2](Samuel Dokko). However, after transplant an artificial body part or internal organ, is that human a human or cyborg? Because our body contain piece of organ and material that is not born naturally and is not organic, so does that consider as a human or cyborg?
Figure of cyborg
How cyborg being define? Is it just a concept in web? Or is really happening around us, as some of us had become cyborg by different reasons. There’re a lot of impact on the definition of human being, social activities and development of human history. Moreover it also brings us new kind of culture like cyberpunk in our new generation, does this kind of culture affect and changes our life continuously? “The figure of the cyborg is at root a spatial metaphor. But how does the idea of the cyborg intersect with spatial theory? In what ways does the cyborg reinforce or contradict other emerging strands of urban thought that also emphasize urban complexity and hybridity? Has the epistemological subtlety and political prescience of the cyborg, as originally formulated in the 1980s, been realized in practice or simply been diffused through the term’s widening usage? And should we ultimately reject the idea of the cyborg as an anachronism derived from cold war science and the first generation of twentieth-century cyberpunk culture?”[3](MATTHEW GANDY)
Cyberpunk and science fiction
Nowadays cyberpunk is a kind of new culture within science fiction and is generate by cyborg. How this culture affect the ordinary science fiction genre in our culture can be explained in this article. “If the investigation of our relationship to science and technology is the definitive feature of science fiction, then the exploration of human couplings with a particular type of technology constitutes a broad categorization of cyberpunk fiction. Cyberpunk, a subgenre of science fiction which emerged in the 1980s, is particularly concerned with exploring the effects of "cyborg technologies" on late twentieth-century culture. Cyberpunk is differentiated from the more mainstream science fiction literature by three central themes which illuminate the role of technology in society: futurology, techno-paradigms, and the cyborg presence” [4](Lauraine Leblanc)
Cyborg and feminism
This can help us have a clear sense about the impact of cyborg on feminism movement. The existence of cyborg brought a huge impact on the idea of feminism, because cyborg is somehow neutral gendered. There are a lot to concern within such circumstances. “A cyborg is a cybernetic organism, a hybrid of machine and organism, a creature of social reality as well as a creature of fiction. Social reality is lived social relations, our most important political construction, and a world-changing fiction. The international women’s movements have constructed “women’s experience,” as well as uncovered or discovered this crucial collective object.”[5] (Steven Seidman)
Cyborg and human self
Since the existence of cyborg, we have been questioning ourselves the boundary between human and cyborg. In this book, they have strong argument on such question; whether we are human or not a human since our ancestor know how to use different tools to live our life. “It picked up speed when our more recent forebears began to wire up telegraph, telephone... It is repeated whenever a child learns to do these things; for the cyborg, ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny. It is not that we have become posthuman in the wireless network era; since Neanderthal early- adopters first picked up sticks and stones, we have never been human.”[6] (William J. Mitchell)
There are still lots of argument in cyborg and human aspects, but I believe one day we will agree that we are all cyborg, because we certainly will be linked up by technology and network connection. We cannot get rid of that happen.
Footnotes:
[1]Samuel Dokko,“Cyborg Bodies in Medicine 2007” 1 March 2009 <http://www.cyborgdb.org/dokko.htm>
[2] Samuel Dokko,“Cyborg Bodies in Medicine 2007” 1 March 2009 <http://www.cyborgdb.org/dokko.htm>
[3] MATTHEW GANDY, International Journal of Urban and Regional Research “Cyborg Urbanization:Complexity and Monstrosity in the Contemporary City” Volume 29.1, March 2005 P 26–49 , 1 March 2009
<http://www.geog.ucl.ac.uk:8080/print-version/about-the-department/people/academics/matthew-gandy/files/pdf1.pdf>
[4] Lauraine Leblanc, “Razor girls: Genre and Gender in Cyberpunk Fiction” 2003 , 1 March 2009<http://project.cyberpunk.ru/idb/genre_and_gender_in_cyberpunk_fiction.html>
[5] Steven Seidman, “The Postmodern Turn: New perspectives on social theory” 1994 1 March 2009<http://books.google.com/books?hl=zh-TW&lr=&id=bcfEK-owDrwC&oi=fnd&pg=PA82&dq=cyborg&ots=mfT7guw-wO&sig=MiA3of1-MlOjUTvy0GKIGPWuBEY#PPP9,M1>
[6] William J. Mitchell, “Me++: The Cyborg Self and the Networked City MIT” 2004 p.169, 1 March 2009 <http://books.google.com/books?hl=zh-TW&lr=&id=wcBo7pq3X1AC&oi=fnd&pg=PA1&dq=cyborg&ots=Xoc2PmmPkt&sig=HN50UfldDRR4E5u6_i4xAP_3Qmw#PPP1,M1>
Bliography:
Lauraine Leblanc, “Razor girls: Genre and Gender in Cyberpunk Fiction” 2003 1 March 2009
<http://project.cyberpunk.ru/idb/genre_and_gender_in_cyberpunk_fiction.html>
MATTHEW GANDY, International Journal of Urban and Regional Research
“Cyborg Urbanization: Complexity and Monstrosity in the Contemporary City” Volume 29.1, March 2005 P 26–49 , 1 March 2009
<http://www.geog.ucl.ac.uk:8080/print-version/about-the-department/people/academics/matthew-gandy/files/pdf1.pdf>
Steven Seidman, “The Postmodern Turn: New perspectives on social theory” Cambridge University Press, 1994 1 March 2009
<http://books.google.com/books?hl=zh-TW&lr=&id=bcfEK-owDrwC&oi=fnd&pg=PA82&dq=cyborg&ots=mfT7guw-wO&sig=MiA3of1-MlOjUTvy0GKIGPWuBEY#PPP9,M1>
Samuel Dokko, “Cyborg Bodies in Medicine 2007” 1 March 2009 “http://www.cyborgdb.org/dokko.htm”
William J. Mitchell, “Me++: The Cyborg Self and the Networked City MIT” Press, 2004 1 March 2009<http://books.google.com/books?hl=zh-TW&lr=&id=wcBo7pq3X1AC&oi=fnd&pg=PA1&dq=cyborg&ots=Xoc2PmmPkt&sig=HN50UfldDRR4E5u6_i4xAP_3Qmw#PPP1,M1>
Critical Annotated Webliography by Luk Ka Chun 10321394
Cyborgs are hybrid entities that are neither wholly technological nor completely organic, which means that the cyborg has the potential not only to disrupt persistent dualisms [in language and thought] … but also to refashion our thinking. (Balsamo). Drawing on current scholarly work, I will discuss is cyborg still a transgressive figure in the following.
Since technology develops rapidly day by day, it is predicted and can be sure that the cyborg will be more and more advance and intelligent than human. Soon they will exceed the expectation of human. As Donna Haraway mentioned, “The cyborg is a creature in a post-gender world; it has no truck with bisexuality, pre-oedipal symbiosis, unalienated labour, or other seductions to organic wholeness through a final appropriation of all the powers of the parts into a higher unity.”[1] Because of these, it is possible that human will be replaced by cyborgs in the future. Haraway had something similar since she said, “The cyborg is resolutely committed to partiality, irony, intimacy, and perversity. It is oppositional, utopian, and completely without innocence. No longer structured by the polarity of public and private, the cyborg defines a technological polls based partly on a revolution of social relations in the oikos, the household. Nature and culture are reworked; the one can no longer be the resource for appropriation or incorporation by the other. The rela-tionships for forming wholes from parts, including those of polarity and hierarchical domination, are at issue in the cyborg world.”[2] Moreover, the technology will blur the boundary between animal-human (organism) and machine. Haraway wrote that, “….. basically machines were not self-moving, self-designing, autonomous. They could not achieve man's dream, only mock it. They were not man, an author to himself, but only a caricature of that masculinist reproductive dream. To think they were otherwise was paranoid. Now we are not so sure. Late twentieth-century machines have made thoroughly ambiguous the difference between natural and artificial, mind and body, self-developing and externally designed, and many other distinctions that used to apply to organisms and machines. Our machines are disturbingly lively, and we ourselves frighteningly inert.”[3] And Haraway had a subset of this distinction, in which she noted that the boundary between physical and non-physical is very imprecise for us. “Our best machines are made of sunshine; they are all light and clean because they are nothing but signals, electromagnetic waves, a section of a spectrum, and these machines are eminently portable, mobile -- a matter of immense human pain in Detroit and Singapore. People are nowhere near so fluid, being both material and opaque. Cyborgs are ether, quintessence. The ubiquity and invisibility of cyborgs is precisely why these sunshine-belt machines are so deadly. They are as hard to see politically as materially. They are about consciousness - or its simulation.”[4]
In another source of Donna Haraway’s work, it talked about the view from Donna Haraway towards the political identity of cyborgs. Obviously, Haraway is very cleared about what the cyborgs are doing since the article stated “She is very clear that we must enter the cyborg politic with eyes wide open, and be aware of its agenda. By trying to construct and deconstruct the binaries between machine/human, man/woman, white/black and revolutionary/conservative, she is trying to give ways to think differently about the balance of power in human systems.”[5] In addition, Haraway pointed out three major boundaries break down in the formation of cyborgs, namely human and animal; animal-human and machine and physical and non-physical.
Another source that I had found is about Viagra Cyborgs. The writer Annie Potts showed some of her ideas towards cyborgs about the blurring boundaries between natural and artificial after men have intake the Viagra. She had written this, ‘As Meika Loe has argued, Viagra rhetoric consistently uses and produces metaphors of machinery: the penis is treated as part of the male machine; erections are seen to operate according to the principles of simple hydraulics, and as Barbara Marshall puts it, Viagra is constructed as “a mechanical solution to a mechanical problem”.’[6] She even had a new term Viagraborg to imply the men after taking Viagra. Furthermore, she listed out some of the key purposes of cyborgs that are supposed to provide, which “can be restorative (they return lost functions as in the case of prosthetic organs or limbs), normalizing (they re-establish some entity to a state indistinguishable from ‘normality’), and enhancing (they improve a current capacity or function).”[7]
As a matter of fact, technology has been a great help and aid to the development of cyborgs. In David Mertz’s work, he said that “Early examples of cyborgs generally centered around mechanical enhancements to motion; the growing prevalence of electronic sensors and computers led to discussion of cyborgs that improve human perception, cognition, and communications channels. With inventions in genomics and nanotechnology at the start of the 21st century, visions of cyborgs often discuss augmentation of human health and longevity.”[8] He also expressed the idea that humans in the last several thousand years are shaped by the utilization and presence of technologies around them or physically manipulated or attached to them. Thus for cyborgs, they must have “a meaningful feedback mechanism with its biological aspects.”[9] And there is an expression in which he quoted other scholar’s idea about representing human as cyborgs and have a comparison with Donna Haraway’s thinking, such as “For some, such as Haldane (1923) or Weiner (1965), cyborgs simply represent an extension of the positive capabilities of technologies; most practicing doctors and medical researchers probably share this attitude, albeit infrequently naming medically assisted humans as cyborgs. Another trend in social thought, however, puts a positive light on cyborgs because of their possibility of breaking down normative roles of gender, class, race, or other subaltern status (perhaps as much by compelling metaphor as by direct intervention). This tradition largely follows Michel Foucault’s conception of biopower; Haraway (1991) is a prominent thinker in this tradition.”[10]
For the final source that I have found, it is Cyborgs and moral identity by G Gillett. The superficial summary of this article is about the writer have some doubt about the blurred boundaries between integrated part human and part machine. He raised an argument that “If my brain functions in a way that is supported by and exploits intelligent technology both external and implantable, then how should I be treated and what is my moral status—am I a machine or am I a person?”[11] Since there is no absolute definition to indicate human and cyborgs, the answer remains undefined. Yet, he supported this with some of the medical cases to provide further comparison and reference.
Bibliography
1. Haraway, Donna. Simians, (1991) ‘Cyborgs and Women: The Reinvention of Nature’, http://www.stanford.edu/dept/HPS/Haraway/CyborgManifesto.html (accessed 2 March 2009)
2. Haraway, Donna. (1991) ‘A Cyborg Manifesto: Science, Technology, and Socialist-Feminism in the Late Twentieth Century’, http://www.hynam.org/HY/pap/cyborg.pdf (accessed 1 March 2009)
3. Potts, Annie. ‘Sex and the Body’. http://www.lse.ac.uk/collections/BIOS/pdf/AnniePotts.pdf (accessed 1 March 2009)
4. Mertz, David. ‘Cyborgs’. http://gnosis.cx/publish/mertz/Cyborgs.pdf (accessed 2 March 2009)
5. Gillett G.. (2005) ‘Cyborgs and moral identity’. Journal of Medical Ethics 32, http://jme.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/32/2/79 (accessed 1 March 2009)
Footnotes
[1] Donna Haraway. Simians. Cyborgs and Women: The Reinvention of Nature. 1991. p.150. http://www.stanford.edu/dept/HPS/Haraway/CyborgManifesto.html
[2] Donna Haraway. Simians. Cyborgs and Women: The Reinvention of Nature. 1991. p.151. http://www.stanford.edu/dept/HPS/Haraway/CyborgManifesto.html
[3] Donna Haraway. Simians. Cyborgs and Women: The Reinvention of Nature. 1991. p.152. http://www.stanford.edu/dept/HPS/Haraway/CyborgManifesto.html
[4] Donna Haraway. Simians. Cyborgs and Women: The Reinvention of Nature. 1991. p.153. http://www.stanford.edu/dept/HPS/Haraway/CyborgManifesto.html
[5] Donna Haraway. "A Cyborg Manifesto: Science, Technology, and Socialist-Feminism in the Late Twentieth Century". 1991. p.2. http://www.hynam.org/HY/pap/cyborg.pdf
[6] Annie Potts. Viagra Cyborgs: Creating ‘Better Manhood Through Chemistry’?. p.1-2. http://www.lse.ac.uk/collections/BIOS/pdf/AnniePotts.pdf
[7] Annie Potts. Viagra Cyborgs: Creating ‘Better Manhood Through Chemistry’?. p.3. http://www.lse.ac.uk/collections/BIOS/pdf/AnniePotts.pdf
[8] David Mertz. Cyborgs. p.1. http://gnosis.cx/publish/mertz/Cyborgs.pdf
[9] David Mertz. Cyborgs. p.1. http://gnosis.cx/publish/mertz/Cyborgs.pdf
[10] David Mertz. Cyborgs. p.2. http://gnosis.cx/publish/mertz/Cyborgs.pdf
[11] G Gillett. Cyborgs and moral Identity. 2005. p.1. http://jme.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/32/2/79
Since technology develops rapidly day by day, it is predicted and can be sure that the cyborg will be more and more advance and intelligent than human. Soon they will exceed the expectation of human. As Donna Haraway mentioned, “The cyborg is a creature in a post-gender world; it has no truck with bisexuality, pre-oedipal symbiosis, unalienated labour, or other seductions to organic wholeness through a final appropriation of all the powers of the parts into a higher unity.”[1] Because of these, it is possible that human will be replaced by cyborgs in the future. Haraway had something similar since she said, “The cyborg is resolutely committed to partiality, irony, intimacy, and perversity. It is oppositional, utopian, and completely without innocence. No longer structured by the polarity of public and private, the cyborg defines a technological polls based partly on a revolution of social relations in the oikos, the household. Nature and culture are reworked; the one can no longer be the resource for appropriation or incorporation by the other. The rela-tionships for forming wholes from parts, including those of polarity and hierarchical domination, are at issue in the cyborg world.”[2] Moreover, the technology will blur the boundary between animal-human (organism) and machine. Haraway wrote that, “….. basically machines were not self-moving, self-designing, autonomous. They could not achieve man's dream, only mock it. They were not man, an author to himself, but only a caricature of that masculinist reproductive dream. To think they were otherwise was paranoid. Now we are not so sure. Late twentieth-century machines have made thoroughly ambiguous the difference between natural and artificial, mind and body, self-developing and externally designed, and many other distinctions that used to apply to organisms and machines. Our machines are disturbingly lively, and we ourselves frighteningly inert.”[3] And Haraway had a subset of this distinction, in which she noted that the boundary between physical and non-physical is very imprecise for us. “Our best machines are made of sunshine; they are all light and clean because they are nothing but signals, electromagnetic waves, a section of a spectrum, and these machines are eminently portable, mobile -- a matter of immense human pain in Detroit and Singapore. People are nowhere near so fluid, being both material and opaque. Cyborgs are ether, quintessence. The ubiquity and invisibility of cyborgs is precisely why these sunshine-belt machines are so deadly. They are as hard to see politically as materially. They are about consciousness - or its simulation.”[4]
In another source of Donna Haraway’s work, it talked about the view from Donna Haraway towards the political identity of cyborgs. Obviously, Haraway is very cleared about what the cyborgs are doing since the article stated “She is very clear that we must enter the cyborg politic with eyes wide open, and be aware of its agenda. By trying to construct and deconstruct the binaries between machine/human, man/woman, white/black and revolutionary/conservative, she is trying to give ways to think differently about the balance of power in human systems.”[5] In addition, Haraway pointed out three major boundaries break down in the formation of cyborgs, namely human and animal; animal-human and machine and physical and non-physical.
Another source that I had found is about Viagra Cyborgs. The writer Annie Potts showed some of her ideas towards cyborgs about the blurring boundaries between natural and artificial after men have intake the Viagra. She had written this, ‘As Meika Loe has argued, Viagra rhetoric consistently uses and produces metaphors of machinery: the penis is treated as part of the male machine; erections are seen to operate according to the principles of simple hydraulics, and as Barbara Marshall puts it, Viagra is constructed as “a mechanical solution to a mechanical problem”.’[6] She even had a new term Viagraborg to imply the men after taking Viagra. Furthermore, she listed out some of the key purposes of cyborgs that are supposed to provide, which “can be restorative (they return lost functions as in the case of prosthetic organs or limbs), normalizing (they re-establish some entity to a state indistinguishable from ‘normality’), and enhancing (they improve a current capacity or function).”[7]
As a matter of fact, technology has been a great help and aid to the development of cyborgs. In David Mertz’s work, he said that “Early examples of cyborgs generally centered around mechanical enhancements to motion; the growing prevalence of electronic sensors and computers led to discussion of cyborgs that improve human perception, cognition, and communications channels. With inventions in genomics and nanotechnology at the start of the 21st century, visions of cyborgs often discuss augmentation of human health and longevity.”[8] He also expressed the idea that humans in the last several thousand years are shaped by the utilization and presence of technologies around them or physically manipulated or attached to them. Thus for cyborgs, they must have “a meaningful feedback mechanism with its biological aspects.”[9] And there is an expression in which he quoted other scholar’s idea about representing human as cyborgs and have a comparison with Donna Haraway’s thinking, such as “For some, such as Haldane (1923) or Weiner (1965), cyborgs simply represent an extension of the positive capabilities of technologies; most practicing doctors and medical researchers probably share this attitude, albeit infrequently naming medically assisted humans as cyborgs. Another trend in social thought, however, puts a positive light on cyborgs because of their possibility of breaking down normative roles of gender, class, race, or other subaltern status (perhaps as much by compelling metaphor as by direct intervention). This tradition largely follows Michel Foucault’s conception of biopower; Haraway (1991) is a prominent thinker in this tradition.”[10]
For the final source that I have found, it is Cyborgs and moral identity by G Gillett. The superficial summary of this article is about the writer have some doubt about the blurred boundaries between integrated part human and part machine. He raised an argument that “If my brain functions in a way that is supported by and exploits intelligent technology both external and implantable, then how should I be treated and what is my moral status—am I a machine or am I a person?”[11] Since there is no absolute definition to indicate human and cyborgs, the answer remains undefined. Yet, he supported this with some of the medical cases to provide further comparison and reference.
Bibliography
1. Haraway, Donna. Simians, (1991) ‘Cyborgs and Women: The Reinvention of Nature’, http://www.stanford.edu/dept/HPS/Haraway/CyborgManifesto.html (accessed 2 March 2009)
2. Haraway, Donna. (1991) ‘A Cyborg Manifesto: Science, Technology, and Socialist-Feminism in the Late Twentieth Century’, http://www.hynam.org/HY/pap/cyborg.pdf (accessed 1 March 2009)
3. Potts, Annie. ‘Sex and the Body’. http://www.lse.ac.uk/collections/BIOS/pdf/AnniePotts.pdf (accessed 1 March 2009)
4. Mertz, David. ‘Cyborgs’. http://gnosis.cx/publish/mertz/Cyborgs.pdf (accessed 2 March 2009)
5. Gillett G.. (2005) ‘Cyborgs and moral identity’. Journal of Medical Ethics 32, http://jme.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/32/2/79 (accessed 1 March 2009)
Footnotes
[1] Donna Haraway. Simians. Cyborgs and Women: The Reinvention of Nature. 1991. p.150. http://www.stanford.edu/dept/HPS/Haraway/CyborgManifesto.html
[2] Donna Haraway. Simians. Cyborgs and Women: The Reinvention of Nature. 1991. p.151. http://www.stanford.edu/dept/HPS/Haraway/CyborgManifesto.html
[3] Donna Haraway. Simians. Cyborgs and Women: The Reinvention of Nature. 1991. p.152. http://www.stanford.edu/dept/HPS/Haraway/CyborgManifesto.html
[4] Donna Haraway. Simians. Cyborgs and Women: The Reinvention of Nature. 1991. p.153. http://www.stanford.edu/dept/HPS/Haraway/CyborgManifesto.html
[5] Donna Haraway. "A Cyborg Manifesto: Science, Technology, and Socialist-Feminism in the Late Twentieth Century". 1991. p.2. http://www.hynam.org/HY/pap/cyborg.pdf
[6] Annie Potts. Viagra Cyborgs: Creating ‘Better Manhood Through Chemistry’?. p.1-2. http://www.lse.ac.uk/collections/BIOS/pdf/AnniePotts.pdf
[7] Annie Potts. Viagra Cyborgs: Creating ‘Better Manhood Through Chemistry’?. p.3. http://www.lse.ac.uk/collections/BIOS/pdf/AnniePotts.pdf
[8] David Mertz. Cyborgs. p.1. http://gnosis.cx/publish/mertz/Cyborgs.pdf
[9] David Mertz. Cyborgs. p.1. http://gnosis.cx/publish/mertz/Cyborgs.pdf
[10] David Mertz. Cyborgs. p.2. http://gnosis.cx/publish/mertz/Cyborgs.pdf
[11] G Gillett. Cyborgs and moral Identity. 2005. p.1. http://jme.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/32/2/79
Critical Annotated Webliography by Goofy
1. Cyborgs are hybrid entities that are neither wholly technological nor completely organic,which means that the cyborgs has the potential not only to disrupt persistent dualisms [in language and thought]… but also to refashion our thinking’. (Balsamo). Drawing on current scholarly work, discuss ways in which the cyborgs is still a transgressive figure.
Introduction
Finding relevant and utilizing sources is an important step before writing an essay. Due to the restrictions of online sources are limited, therefore, I tried to find some journals to be the findings for supporting this assignment as the credibility of journals would be higher. And here are the five websites that I would like to use in the chosen essay.
Findings and Analysis of Sources
In Haraway’s essay “Haraway on our Cyborg Society”, she said that we are all a cyborg in this hi- tech society. In this society, the complex things become one, for example, biology and technology, man and machine. She said that "a creature of social reality as well as a creature of fiction. Social reality is lived social relations, our most important political construction, a world-changing fiction" (Haraway, p.149) [1] We can change our bodies by technology. Haraway states that to the online world, there are no restriction of construction of avatars, apparent shape shifting and the identity. And she thinks gendered naming of a person is an example of interpellation, which is a type of per formative utterance. Meanwhile, it can create the maleness or femaleness of the subject to identify. When someone changes identities, she (or he, or it) leaves part of herself behind, a fragment of her life to be resumed later. This asynchronous quality is also characteristic of contemporary cyborg existence. Some aspects of identity are short-lived, selves that exist only in certain restricted contexts.
According to Jonathan Marshall's article“The Online Body Breaks Out? Asence, Ghosts, Cyborgs, Gender, Polarity and Politics”, he described that “as online and offline blur, and are intimately involved, it is useful to begin by looking at some offline issues around bodies, in particular those around boundaries.” (Jonathan Marshall, 2004). [2] He claims that the boundary between home and work is blurred today. Due to the advanced technology, people can still work in their homes after working every day and everywhere as most of the people have their own computers, even the portable one. Therefore, there is a forever extension of working to people. It makes people always stick with then technology, and we seem like a cyborg. He also stated that “Western” cultures already have a set of “virtual body” constructions, which are complementary to our constructions of the “physical body”; those of the “soul”, the “mind”, and the “ghost”, all of which blend together due to their status of being “not-physical” bodies. The polarity between mind/body, generates the parallel of “virtual” or online for “spiritual”, and offline for physical.”(Jonathan Marshall) From the above description, Marshall indicated that people who are online that they become a virtual body at that period, their soul, mind and ghost would blend together being “non- physical” bodies. But when they offline, they back to the physical body. Thus, Marshall thinks that technology affect us a lot in the daily life, no matter in a good way or bad way.
According to the article "Cyborgization of Sport", it indicated that cyborgization of sport has come to the forefront of the national conscious in these few years. People concerned about many questions of this aspect. For example, if a football player uses prosthesis [3] to replace his human legs with some sort of upgrade which can help him to play better in the matches, then can he do it? Also, the article was showed that a surgery which called ‘Tommy John surgery’ is popular after Tommy John who is one of the America’s baseball players in MLB (Major League Baseball) and he is the first person to try this surgery. Due to many baseball players like Tommy John would also harmed their arms in their daily trainings and matches, and it claims that after having this surgery, those pitchers can throw harder than they ever were able to do before. Therefore, some of the baseball players also had this surgery. But how can the people define those who had the surgery of using prosthesis on their bodies? Are they become cyborgs? This article leaves us many rooms to think deeper by ourselves. The concern of prosthesis technology would come to us someday, but before that moment, we still need to follow the rules and to know that what is legal and illegal in sports today.
“Cyber Gender” is mainly focusing on the gender in cyberspace which was written by Jennifer Breen. It indicated that people in cyberspace can change their gender anytime as they pleased. According to Ted Kaiser's "The Internet Cyborg" [4], he states that “The new identity is formed from the relationship between the original identity and the internet. It is a cyborg identity, part machine, part human.”(Ted Kaiser, 1999) For example, if you become a member of an online game, though the Internet might not join you in a physical way, it also becomes a part of you as the identity you create on the Internet is an extension of yourself, on the other hand, you become an extension of that identity too. In cyberspace, you can control the identity that is created by you. Moreover, you can switch your gender for fun or even from any reasons to no reasons. In the real world, we cannot have a big change base on our sex, race, and age and so on, but in the virtual world, we can be anyone as we like. It is hard to separate you between the real world and the virtual world completely nowadays.
Chris Thorp’s article “How the concept of the cyborg has changed human self-perception” is leading us to think about many interesting questions about what does it mean to be human? When does a human lose their humanity? Thorp lets us know that the dualisms that currently define humanity are finally being challenged. In this article, Thorp base on the movie “Blade Runner” to explain what the differences between us and the replicants are. He described that the main differences are we have memory, emotion and thinking, but the replicants did not. Although cyborgs have influenced our understanding of self, they also informed our concepts of self and dualisms. He thinks that the cyborg concept is a useful tool to explore the questions of humanity.
Conclusion
Base on the above findings, it shows that most of the scholars also think that it is hardly to separate human and non- human completely as we all live in hi- tech society nowadays as we cannot live without the technology. Though there is a scholar claims that human is not the cyborg as we have human’s emotions and thinking. But for improving our life quality, the advanced technology is really important to us. Therefore, we can see that there is the link between us and the technology. That is the reason that it seems we all becomes a cyborg in these recent years.
Footnotes
[1] Haraway, Donna J. “Simians, Cyborgs, and Women: The Reinvention of Nature.” Routledge, 1991.
[2] Jonathan Marshallis, “Bachelard and the Alchemy of Ethnography”. University of Technology Sydney, 2004.
[3] Prosthesis, which means the legs or arms and so on to instead the people’s harmed limbs
[4] Ted Kaiser , “The Internet Cyborg”. http://articles.halfempty.com/media/99-04-11.htm (4 March 2009)
Bibliography
1. David Ellis, “Haraway on our Cyborg Society”, The Cyborg Self, Brown University. (Spring 2005) http://www.cyberartsweb.org/cpace/cyborg/ellis9.html (4 March 2008)
2. Jonathan Marshall, “The Online Body Breaks Out? Asence, Ghosts, Cyborgs, Gender, Polarity and Politics”, (1994-1998).
http://www.journal.fibreculture.org/issue3/issue3_marshall.html#1 (4 March 2008)
3. Eli Schulman, “Cyborgization of Sport”. “Cyborg DB: The World’s Largest Cyborg Database”, (2007). http://cyborgdb.org/schulman.htm (4 March 2008)
4. Jennifer Breen, “Cyber Gender”. “Cyborg DB: The World’s Largest Cyborg Database”, (2007). http://cyborgdb.org/breen.htm (5 March 2008)
Ted Kaiser , “The Internet Cyborg”. http://articles.halfempty.com/media/99-04-11.htm (4 March 2009)
5. Chris Thorp, “How the concept of the cyborg has changed human self-perception”, (2002). http://brmovie.com/Analysis/Concept_of_the_Cyborg.htm (5 March 2009)
Introduction
Finding relevant and utilizing sources is an important step before writing an essay. Due to the restrictions of online sources are limited, therefore, I tried to find some journals to be the findings for supporting this assignment as the credibility of journals would be higher. And here are the five websites that I would like to use in the chosen essay.
Findings and Analysis of Sources
In Haraway’s essay “Haraway on our Cyborg Society”, she said that we are all a cyborg in this hi- tech society. In this society, the complex things become one, for example, biology and technology, man and machine. She said that "a creature of social reality as well as a creature of fiction. Social reality is lived social relations, our most important political construction, a world-changing fiction" (Haraway, p.149) [1] We can change our bodies by technology. Haraway states that to the online world, there are no restriction of construction of avatars, apparent shape shifting and the identity. And she thinks gendered naming of a person is an example of interpellation, which is a type of per formative utterance. Meanwhile, it can create the maleness or femaleness of the subject to identify. When someone changes identities, she (or he, or it) leaves part of herself behind, a fragment of her life to be resumed later. This asynchronous quality is also characteristic of contemporary cyborg existence. Some aspects of identity are short-lived, selves that exist only in certain restricted contexts.
According to Jonathan Marshall's article“The Online Body Breaks Out? Asence, Ghosts, Cyborgs, Gender, Polarity and Politics”, he described that “as online and offline blur, and are intimately involved, it is useful to begin by looking at some offline issues around bodies, in particular those around boundaries.” (Jonathan Marshall, 2004). [2] He claims that the boundary between home and work is blurred today. Due to the advanced technology, people can still work in their homes after working every day and everywhere as most of the people have their own computers, even the portable one. Therefore, there is a forever extension of working to people. It makes people always stick with then technology, and we seem like a cyborg. He also stated that “Western” cultures already have a set of “virtual body” constructions, which are complementary to our constructions of the “physical body”; those of the “soul”, the “mind”, and the “ghost”, all of which blend together due to their status of being “not-physical” bodies. The polarity between mind/body, generates the parallel of “virtual” or online for “spiritual”, and offline for physical.”(Jonathan Marshall) From the above description, Marshall indicated that people who are online that they become a virtual body at that period, their soul, mind and ghost would blend together being “non- physical” bodies. But when they offline, they back to the physical body. Thus, Marshall thinks that technology affect us a lot in the daily life, no matter in a good way or bad way.
According to the article "Cyborgization of Sport", it indicated that cyborgization of sport has come to the forefront of the national conscious in these few years. People concerned about many questions of this aspect. For example, if a football player uses prosthesis [3] to replace his human legs with some sort of upgrade which can help him to play better in the matches, then can he do it? Also, the article was showed that a surgery which called ‘Tommy John surgery’ is popular after Tommy John who is one of the America’s baseball players in MLB (Major League Baseball) and he is the first person to try this surgery. Due to many baseball players like Tommy John would also harmed their arms in their daily trainings and matches, and it claims that after having this surgery, those pitchers can throw harder than they ever were able to do before. Therefore, some of the baseball players also had this surgery. But how can the people define those who had the surgery of using prosthesis on their bodies? Are they become cyborgs? This article leaves us many rooms to think deeper by ourselves. The concern of prosthesis technology would come to us someday, but before that moment, we still need to follow the rules and to know that what is legal and illegal in sports today.
“Cyber Gender” is mainly focusing on the gender in cyberspace which was written by Jennifer Breen. It indicated that people in cyberspace can change their gender anytime as they pleased. According to Ted Kaiser's "The Internet Cyborg" [4], he states that “The new identity is formed from the relationship between the original identity and the internet. It is a cyborg identity, part machine, part human.”(Ted Kaiser, 1999) For example, if you become a member of an online game, though the Internet might not join you in a physical way, it also becomes a part of you as the identity you create on the Internet is an extension of yourself, on the other hand, you become an extension of that identity too. In cyberspace, you can control the identity that is created by you. Moreover, you can switch your gender for fun or even from any reasons to no reasons. In the real world, we cannot have a big change base on our sex, race, and age and so on, but in the virtual world, we can be anyone as we like. It is hard to separate you between the real world and the virtual world completely nowadays.
Chris Thorp’s article “How the concept of the cyborg has changed human self-perception” is leading us to think about many interesting questions about what does it mean to be human? When does a human lose their humanity? Thorp lets us know that the dualisms that currently define humanity are finally being challenged. In this article, Thorp base on the movie “Blade Runner” to explain what the differences between us and the replicants are. He described that the main differences are we have memory, emotion and thinking, but the replicants did not. Although cyborgs have influenced our understanding of self, they also informed our concepts of self and dualisms. He thinks that the cyborg concept is a useful tool to explore the questions of humanity.
Conclusion
Base on the above findings, it shows that most of the scholars also think that it is hardly to separate human and non- human completely as we all live in hi- tech society nowadays as we cannot live without the technology. Though there is a scholar claims that human is not the cyborg as we have human’s emotions and thinking. But for improving our life quality, the advanced technology is really important to us. Therefore, we can see that there is the link between us and the technology. That is the reason that it seems we all becomes a cyborg in these recent years.
Footnotes
[1] Haraway, Donna J. “Simians, Cyborgs, and Women: The Reinvention of Nature.” Routledge, 1991.
[2] Jonathan Marshallis, “Bachelard and the Alchemy of Ethnography”. University of Technology Sydney, 2004.
[3] Prosthesis, which means the legs or arms and so on to instead the people’s harmed limbs
[4] Ted Kaiser , “The Internet Cyborg”. http://articles.halfempty.com/media/99-04-11.htm (4 March 2009)
Bibliography
1. David Ellis, “Haraway on our Cyborg Society”, The Cyborg Self, Brown University. (Spring 2005) http://www.cyberartsweb.org/cpace/cyborg/ellis9.html (4 March 2008)
2. Jonathan Marshall, “The Online Body Breaks Out? Asence, Ghosts, Cyborgs, Gender, Polarity and Politics”, (1994-1998).
http://www.journal.fibreculture.org/issue3/issue3_marshall.html#1 (4 March 2008)
3. Eli Schulman, “Cyborgization of Sport”. “Cyborg DB: The World’s Largest Cyborg Database”, (2007). http://cyborgdb.org/schulman.htm (4 March 2008)
4. Jennifer Breen, “Cyber Gender”. “Cyborg DB: The World’s Largest Cyborg Database”, (2007). http://cyborgdb.org/breen.htm (5 March 2008)
Ted Kaiser , “The Internet Cyborg”. http://articles.halfempty.com/media/99-04-11.htm (4 March 2009)
5. Chris Thorp, “How the concept of the cyborg has changed human self-perception”, (2002). http://brmovie.com/Analysis/Concept_of_the_Cyborg.htm (5 March 2009)
i-n-t-r-o-d-u-c-t-i-o-n***
hi everyone,this is Goofy.i'm an enthusiast about film.bc and kubrick are the places i always visit.Unfortunately,da kinds of film i love to watch are those most of my fds do not interested in,thus,i even can't ring a bell since when i started to watch films myself.
I think some of you may know or met her before in skool,Joyce.She is my best friend in Space.I love her soooooo much! =]
And this is my beloved Mickey,this one looks so devilish,,so lovely.
See you guys in class later.Bye" =]
Critical Annotated Webliography by FoonMing Leung
Question 1
Referring to Manfred Clynes and Nathan Kline, the definition of a cyborg is a cybernetic organism. They first used it in an article “Cyborgs and Space” to discuss about the advantages of self-regulating human-machine systems in outer space. A cyborg is an organism that has both artificial and natural systems. The development of cyborgs nowadays would be more advanced which we cannot simply identify them. Anne Balsamo claimed that the cyborgs could reshape our thinking due to the disruption of dualisms. In this essay, I would like to provide the views of different scholars for the situation of cyborgs and whether the cyborg is still a transgressive figure.
“High-tech culture challenges these dualisms in intriguing ways.” It was the conclusion of Donna Haraway about the emergence of cyborgs in” A Cyborg Manifesto: Science, Technology, and Socialist-Feminism in the Late Twentieth Century”. She and Balsamo suggested cyborg feminism. The troubling dualisms are like, self VS other, mind VS body, culture VS nature, male VS female, maker VS made, truth VS illusion, total VS partial, God VS man, etc. It was all about nature VS artificial which religion groups claimed that cyborgs would be regarded as violation of nature. However, she thought that feminism would be a force to advocate a more transgressive cyborg which changed the male dominations in reality. The dualism could not be always right because it did not represent the real us. For the sake of great human satisfaction, Haraway thought that human would be likely to be a cyborg rather than a “goddess”. The cyborg in the future would be a hybrid being.
Daniel Pimley advocated another idea for cyborgs: anti-essentialism. “The cyborg offers us hope not as a ‘thing’, but as a ‘he’ or a ‘she’.” He claimed that being a cyborg would be genderless. In his article “Cyborg Futures: Cyborgs, Cyberpunk and the future of the body”, gender had been discussed. The destruction of gender in the cyberspace would lead to a new opportunity to rethink the gender issue in the reality, especially for female. A Multi-User Domains (MUD), which is a multi-user real-time virtual world described entirely in text establish the stage of being a cyborg. Pimley had interviewed some female MUD users to explore whether they enjoy the freedom to be male, female or neuter. Some said the gender boundaries was so tightened that they uncontrollably performed to be their real sex and some said that they enjoyed to be virtually free. Pimley pointed out that cyborgs would not be disembodied in the future but provided human to redefine the boundaries of our bodies. The inevitability of “the retreat into a world of formless minds and the ultimate repression of our bodies” would be highly discussed in the future.
In “Natural Born Cyborgs: Minds, Technologies, and the Future of Human Intelligence”, Andy Clark talked about our sense of self. He assumed us, human being as a cyborg and we should accept this challenge. For Clark, technologies were not external objects. They were internalizeable tools that cyborgs could incorporate into their very being. He emphasized on the relationship between human and technology. Desire would be the main force which enabled the creation of a humans-as-cyborg being. He provided a lot of technology predictions which allowed us to think about the integrated relationship with cyborgs. His views towards cyborgs were based on his naturalism and technological enthusiasm which declined to accord embodiment a central role in future human-technology relations. The "potent, portable machinery linking the user to an increasingly responsive World Wide Web," as well as "the gradual smartening-up and interconnection of the many everyday objects which populate our homes and offices” offered us the “mindware upgrades”.
Maybe a cyborg already exists in our conception. The line between cyborgs and human is gradually blurred. Margaret Talbot in her essay” The way we live now: 6-15-03; My Son, the Cyborg “said that the “cyborgian life” was permeating in daily life. Although it is due to human are embraced by technology nowadays. There must be at least one technology accompanying you. Mobile phones, mp3 players, video games and computers were more “humanlike” and you sometimes could be trapped into the virtual world. Talbot provided another example to illustrate that there were already many “cyborgs” in reality: those who got implanted or received cosmetic surgery. She explained that “experiments with ''bionic technology,'' like brain implants that can restore vision to the blind or mobility to the paralyzed, are now proceeding with human subjects.” The goal of making cyborgs more humanlike might be the dreams of many human. However, the making of humans a little more like cyborgs seems to be applying to reality.
According to “The cyborgs are coming”, Baiju Parthan, the writer, foresaw that the co-existence of human and machines. He suggested that “Post-humanism” would become a new ideology of the future world which means that human would employ technology as a tool to be more intelligent and perfect. Parthan had given some ideas to us that allow us to get prepared for this new trend. Kevin Warwick, Professor from the University of Reading, Britain, he had implanted chip in his left arm wirelessly linked him to the network. He could do lots of things wirelessly in the campus. After removal of the implant, Professor Warwick felt depressed and admitted that he had felt "an affinity to the computer" with the implant. Parthan pointed out that the case of Warwick might be too serious but proofed that cyborgs did exist in our daily life and we were getting used to them, like the patients who implanted pacemakers or those who carried laptops everywhere. He finally reassumed that human beings were already the super-intelligent machines but the integration and dependence on the technology would be a serious threat in the future.
Cyborgs are an organism that has both artificial and natural systems which always cause argument towards its advantages and disadvantages. Nonetheless, Cyborgs are gradually not regarded as a figure because the boundaries between human and technology are getting blurred and invisible. According to the above scholars, the post-humanism is getting popular by the human desire of advanced technology; the cyborg feminism offers the power to beat the essentialism which allows the growing number of cyborgs; the everywhere technology enables the disembodiment and the creation of “natural cyborgs”. The development and transformation of cyborgs would be much more transgressive. It is suggested that cyborgs would be treated as “being”. The penetration of technology and the desire of human for advancement would bring cyborgs to an upper level: hybrid being.
Reference:
1. Clynes, Manfred E.and Nathan S. Kline. "Cyborgs and Space". 1.3.09 <http://www.scribd.com/doc/2962194/Cyborgs-and-Space-Clynes-Kline?autodown=pdf>.
2. Haraway, Donna. "An Ironic Dream of a Common Language for Women in the Integrated Circuit". Routledge. 2.3.09 <http://www.stanford.edu/dept/HPS/Haraway/CyborgManifesto.html>.
3. Pimley, Daniel. "Cyborg Futures: Cyborgs, Cyberpunk and the future of the body". Pimley.Net. 2.3.09 <http://www.pimley.net/documents/cyborgfutures.pdf>.
4. Clark, Andy. "NATURAL BORN CYBORGS?” Edge Organization. 3.3.09 <http://edge.org/3rd_culture/clark/clark_index.html>.
5. Talbot, Margaret. "THE WAY WE LIVE NOW: 6-15-03; My Son, the Cyborg". The New York Times. 3.3.09 <http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9905EFDC1339F936A25755C0A9659C8B63>.
6. Parthan, Baiju. "THE CYBORGS ARE... COMING". Life Positive Foundation. 2.3.09 <http://www.lifepositive.com/Mind/evolution/technology/cyborg.asp>.
“High-tech culture challenges these dualisms in intriguing ways.” It was the conclusion of Donna Haraway about the emergence of cyborgs in” A Cyborg Manifesto: Science, Technology, and Socialist-Feminism in the Late Twentieth Century”. She and Balsamo suggested cyborg feminism. The troubling dualisms are like, self VS other, mind VS body, culture VS nature, male VS female, maker VS made, truth VS illusion, total VS partial, God VS man, etc. It was all about nature VS artificial which religion groups claimed that cyborgs would be regarded as violation of nature. However, she thought that feminism would be a force to advocate a more transgressive cyborg which changed the male dominations in reality. The dualism could not be always right because it did not represent the real us. For the sake of great human satisfaction, Haraway thought that human would be likely to be a cyborg rather than a “goddess”. The cyborg in the future would be a hybrid being.
Daniel Pimley advocated another idea for cyborgs: anti-essentialism. “The cyborg offers us hope not as a ‘thing’, but as a ‘he’ or a ‘she’.” He claimed that being a cyborg would be genderless. In his article “Cyborg Futures: Cyborgs, Cyberpunk and the future of the body”, gender had been discussed. The destruction of gender in the cyberspace would lead to a new opportunity to rethink the gender issue in the reality, especially for female. A Multi-User Domains (MUD), which is a multi-user real-time virtual world described entirely in text establish the stage of being a cyborg. Pimley had interviewed some female MUD users to explore whether they enjoy the freedom to be male, female or neuter. Some said the gender boundaries was so tightened that they uncontrollably performed to be their real sex and some said that they enjoyed to be virtually free. Pimley pointed out that cyborgs would not be disembodied in the future but provided human to redefine the boundaries of our bodies. The inevitability of “the retreat into a world of formless minds and the ultimate repression of our bodies” would be highly discussed in the future.
In “Natural Born Cyborgs: Minds, Technologies, and the Future of Human Intelligence”, Andy Clark talked about our sense of self. He assumed us, human being as a cyborg and we should accept this challenge. For Clark, technologies were not external objects. They were internalizeable tools that cyborgs could incorporate into their very being. He emphasized on the relationship between human and technology. Desire would be the main force which enabled the creation of a humans-as-cyborg being. He provided a lot of technology predictions which allowed us to think about the integrated relationship with cyborgs. His views towards cyborgs were based on his naturalism and technological enthusiasm which declined to accord embodiment a central role in future human-technology relations. The "potent, portable machinery linking the user to an increasingly responsive World Wide Web," as well as "the gradual smartening-up and interconnection of the many everyday objects which populate our homes and offices” offered us the “mindware upgrades”.
Maybe a cyborg already exists in our conception. The line between cyborgs and human is gradually blurred. Margaret Talbot in her essay” The way we live now: 6-15-03; My Son, the Cyborg “said that the “cyborgian life” was permeating in daily life. Although it is due to human are embraced by technology nowadays. There must be at least one technology accompanying you. Mobile phones, mp3 players, video games and computers were more “humanlike” and you sometimes could be trapped into the virtual world. Talbot provided another example to illustrate that there were already many “cyborgs” in reality: those who got implanted or received cosmetic surgery. She explained that “experiments with ''bionic technology,'' like brain implants that can restore vision to the blind or mobility to the paralyzed, are now proceeding with human subjects.” The goal of making cyborgs more humanlike might be the dreams of many human. However, the making of humans a little more like cyborgs seems to be applying to reality.
According to “The cyborgs are coming”, Baiju Parthan, the writer, foresaw that the co-existence of human and machines. He suggested that “Post-humanism” would become a new ideology of the future world which means that human would employ technology as a tool to be more intelligent and perfect. Parthan had given some ideas to us that allow us to get prepared for this new trend. Kevin Warwick, Professor from the University of Reading, Britain, he had implanted chip in his left arm wirelessly linked him to the network. He could do lots of things wirelessly in the campus. After removal of the implant, Professor Warwick felt depressed and admitted that he had felt "an affinity to the computer" with the implant. Parthan pointed out that the case of Warwick might be too serious but proofed that cyborgs did exist in our daily life and we were getting used to them, like the patients who implanted pacemakers or those who carried laptops everywhere. He finally reassumed that human beings were already the super-intelligent machines but the integration and dependence on the technology would be a serious threat in the future.
Cyborgs are an organism that has both artificial and natural systems which always cause argument towards its advantages and disadvantages. Nonetheless, Cyborgs are gradually not regarded as a figure because the boundaries between human and technology are getting blurred and invisible. According to the above scholars, the post-humanism is getting popular by the human desire of advanced technology; the cyborg feminism offers the power to beat the essentialism which allows the growing number of cyborgs; the everywhere technology enables the disembodiment and the creation of “natural cyborgs”. The development and transformation of cyborgs would be much more transgressive. It is suggested that cyborgs would be treated as “being”. The penetration of technology and the desire of human for advancement would bring cyborgs to an upper level: hybrid being.
Reference:
1. Clynes, Manfred E.and Nathan S. Kline. "Cyborgs and Space". 1.3.09 <http://www.scribd.com/doc/2962194/Cyborgs-and-Space-Clynes-Kline?autodown=pdf>.
2. Haraway, Donna. "An Ironic Dream of a Common Language for Women in the Integrated Circuit". Routledge. 2.3.09 <http://www.stanford.edu/dept/HPS/Haraway/CyborgManifesto.html>.
3. Pimley, Daniel. "Cyborg Futures: Cyborgs, Cyberpunk and the future of the body". Pimley.Net. 2.3.09 <http://www.pimley.net/documents/cyborgfutures.pdf>.
4. Clark, Andy. "NATURAL BORN CYBORGS?” Edge Organization. 3.3.09 <http://edge.org/3rd_culture/clark/clark_index.html>.
5. Talbot, Margaret. "THE WAY WE LIVE NOW: 6-15-03; My Son, the Cyborg". The New York Times. 3.3.09 <http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9905EFDC1339F936A25755C0A9659C8B63>.
6. Parthan, Baiju. "THE CYBORGS ARE... COMING". Life Positive Foundation. 2.3.09 <http://www.lifepositive.com/Mind/evolution/technology/cyborg.asp>.
About Wuchi*
Hello, I am Wuchi, Capricorn. I also believe in astrology, therefore I always get along with people to analyse.“Wu” and “Chi” are the first and the second word of my Chinese name. You may see my name is Candy in name list, but I don't recommend you call me Candy, because I may not take notice of your calling.
Unlike many of you, I am not a student who came from HKU SPACE. Before I come to here, I was graduated in CUTW for my Pre-associate degree, and then I went to BU CIE to complete my associate degree. My concentration in AD is Cinema, Televsion and Digital Media (CTV). I can say that watching TV and script writing are my main hobby of my life. When I was just a primary four student, encouraged by my friend, Kelly, I wrote my first script of my life.
This is one of my work which produced in last year, "Lost Nirvana".
This is one of my work which produced in last year, "Lost Nirvana".
Besides, influenced by my tutor, I interest in Japan visual rock music, especially LUNA SEA and MUCC. However, I know that MUCC is not well-known in HK.
Below picture is MUCC.
Last but not least, I am a dog-lover. For the reason that, I am the only child in my family. Parents need to go to work, there is only a dog which accompanies with me all the time. Thus, my dogs has become my best friend.
She is my best-loved, Happy, a maltese.
Sadly, she had gone in 2005.
Sadly, she had gone in 2005.
She is Puffy, is an over-size Pomeranian.
I took her back to my family after Happy's death.
Now she is just 4 years old.
Now she is just 4 years old.
Actually, this photo was taken by Puff.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)