The first thing I thought about when reading was the Disney movie WALL-E. I loved the movie and the romance that went on between Wall-e and Eva. But what I didn't like was all the obese humans on a spaceship full of super advanced technology that did everything for them. And I absolutely hated the sad looking destroyed uninhabitable earth. Every time I watch it I worry a little in the back of my head. Could the human race really get to that point? Technology is helpful and has changed the world in so many ways. But at what point is it harmful? Is it already significantly harmful without us knowing?This chapter of Monster Culture actually made the world's rapid advancement of technology seem like something we really need to be aware of and it's quite scary. There was a real emphasis on the fact that "technology promises perfection and victory over death." After the chapter went on the "victory over death" part started to make more sense to me. The fact that technology could mean immortality is a weird concept. Technology is becoming more and more amazing to the point where we have robots that are astonishingly artificially intelligent and one day, robots could really become "virtually indistinguishable from humans." In WALL-E some of the robots actually did start to take over humans until humans were able to overcome them. When will there be a day when we can't over come them? Is there a need to make robots so smart that they can manipulate us?
The whole immortality was very pointless to me once I read further in that "when [a] body is destroyed, [its] memory, [its] consciousness, will be transmitted to a new one." I believe that you are not becoming immortal at all. Everyone is unique and just because you transfer someones memory into a piece of technology doesn't mean they will be the same person. I feel like there is a better way to explain it, but it was touched on later in the chapter. All of a sudden if everyone can become immortal then "everybody is nobody." We will all just become one in a whole sea of memories when have been ripped out of its unique rightful owner in which they can only interpret and express.
When Freud theory of opposed energy flows of sex drive and the death drive came up I just thought it was a fancy way of talking about our natural urge to reproduce, which is essentially our way of not dying. But what I really didn't understand was how death of ourselves is like "blending and fusion of separate objects." And how does a "self- contained individual" dissolve into "continuity?"
Overall I enjoyed how different this read was, it turned technology into a monster that humans have created. So doesn't that mean we are our own monster?
Sources:
http://giphy.com/search/wall-e
Levina, Marina, and Diem-My T. Bui. Monster Culture in the 21st Century: A Reader. New York: Bloomsbury Academic, 2013. Print.
Andrea, I found it interesting that you immediately thought of WALL-E while completing the readings. On a similar level, I was reminded of the Star Wars saga while reading. In Star Wars, most characters interact on an identical playing field no matter what their species are or if they are robots. Each character has developed a unique style about themselves which is intriguing when analyzed through the prism of the posthuman. Also, I believe that you raise an engaging question that are "we our own monster?" In my understanding, I feel that in the modern age, humans are constantly developing new tools and technology to advance society in some form. However, the unknown possibilities of the future with technology creates this fear. To an extent, though, humans are certainly the main producers of most of the problems that society faces. Therefore, in a sense, we are our own monsters because of our suspicions over the unknown capabilities of human-made technologies.
ReplyDeleteHey Andrea,
ReplyDeleteI want to address a question you posed in your blog post. You asked, “Is there a need to make robots so smart that they can manipulate us?”
I say, definitely not. Although technology can be useful, the key word there is “useful:” it is of use to us; we use it. When instead the technology uses us, manipulates us, and takes us over, it is obviously no longer useful and we have essentially created our own demise trying to make our lives easier. Now I’m not saying that we should stop advancing in technology, I think technology is a great part of human society. But that’s just it. A PART of human society; it’s a tool. It shouldn’t become who we are. So no. In my eyes, there is definitely no need to make them that intelligent.
While reading the chapter, I also thought that transferring memory (on to what would essentially be a hard drive on a supercomputer) is not the same as achieving immortality. How could a computer possibly operate in a way equivalent to a person's brain? A functioning computer also doesn't remotely sound like consciousness. This memory transfer idea is innately inhuman and therefore not extension of one's life, but of one's memory. If this was to ever occur, the transferred memory would feel more like a simulation than a real person.
ReplyDeleteWhile reading the chapter, I also thought that transferring memory (on to what would essentially be a hard drive on a supercomputer) is not the same as achieving immortality. How could a computer possibly operate in a way equivalent to a person's brain? A functioning computer also doesn't remotely sound like consciousness. This memory transfer idea is innately inhuman and therefore not extension of one's life, but of one's memory. If this was to ever occur, the transferred memory would feel more like a simulation than a real person.
ReplyDeleteAndrea, WALL-E was a great example to think about when referring to the power of technology. Likewise, I immediately related the text to a movie as well. I thought about the movie iRobot! Both movies, WALL-E and iRobot really make me hesitant about the future and the role technology will play in it. With this being said, I agree with the point you made about the chapter from Monster Culture warning us about the increasing power of technology.
ReplyDeleteI wanted to pose a new question for you to think about in reference to the immortality section. You mention how the book explains that once the person dies, their memories and consciousness will be transferred to a new one. You interpret this as the loss of the person. But I saw this as the transfer of the person. What makes me who I am is somewhat combination of my memories, experiences consciousness and my physical body. But what if something happened to my body? If I lose a limb, will I not be the same person? What if there was a way to transfer my brain once my body is tired and useless? If it was transferred to another "body" would I still be Molly? Just a thought.
ReplyDeleteAndrea, you stated that our recent reading made you suddenly aware that the progression of technology needs to be monitored and understood. I wanted to let you know that your surprise is not uncommon. In the somewhat recent past - my sophomore year, if I recall correctly - I took a class on computer ethics as a requirement for my CS degree. In that class, we identified something known as a technological singularity - and no, not the world-ending kind. Rather, a singularity is a point from which you cannot look back. A wonderful example of this is the smartphone: our society is inundated with them, and they have become a part of our every day lives. We access social media with them, have collections of apps, and occasionally camp outside of tech stores for newer releases. However, we also take them for granted - in a certain sense, they have faded into the background.
ReplyDeleteMy father is from Indonesia, and he grew up in a poor village surrounded by rice paddies somewhat South of Jakarta. They do not have plumbing, the water is not very clean, everyday commodities we have - such as air conditioning, and television - are rare there. However, on thing that is highly prevalent amid the rice paddy workers are smart phones. Androids, Blackberries, iPhones, you name it! Weird, right?
Ultimately, my point is that we often brush over the progression of technology, because we are incapable of thinking of a time where such technology did not exist. Thus, when our faces are rubbed in it, we are suddenly very surprised by the possibilities, as well as the actualities, therein.