|
In a panel discussion at the 1998 “Bookends” conference at SUNY Albany, Jacques Derrida spoke of Internet initiatives under way by his younger colleagues in France at the time. The first thing they would do, he said, is set up editorial boards, appoint in-house grant writers, and establish closed review processes – effectively replicating the Continue reading On Reading 300 Works of Electronic Literature: Preliminary Reflections Massive Modularity vs. Cognitive Flexibility Evolutionists insist that genes constrain and direct human behavior. Cultural constructivists counter that culture, embodied in the arts, shapes human experience. Both these claims are true, but some evolutionists and some cultural constructivists have mistakenly regarded them as mutually exclusive (D. S. Wilson, “Evolutionary”). Some evolutionists have either ignored the Continue reading The Adaptive Function of Literature and the Other Arts Whatever the terms “biopower” and “biopolitics” might mean, and they are being used in a growing number of simplistic ways, most of which bear scant relation to how Michel Foucault deployed them. Foucault’s genealogical elaboration of these terms had been conceptual, historical and non-totalizing. Above all, Foucault deployed concepts like “biopower” or “governmentality” in a Continue reading Biopower, Dignity, Synthetic Anthropos Fifteen years ago, John Searle posed a challenge to “strong” artificial intelligence (the program to create in an artificial medium intelligence comparable to that of humans). He confidently proclaimed his challenge would withstand the test of time, including any possible advances in computer speed, memory, and robotic appliances. His challenge, the so-called Chinese Room thought Continue reading Distributing/Disturbing the Chinese Room In Terrence’s Self-Tormentor the old man Chremes proclaims, “I am a human being. I consider nothing human alien to me” (homo sum, humani nil a me alienum puto) – a proclamation of magnanimity that lept out of this 2nd-century B.C. play and took on a proud, expansive life of its own. But alongside the humanistic Continue reading Who am I computing? Thanks to everyone for their challenging remarks. This post contains such responses as I’ve been able to make for the posted comments; I didn’t take them up in the order posted, so I’ve italicized author names to make them easier to find. Bommarito (like Olin) seems to find the experimental results unsurprising, given the commonplace Continue reading Do You Know What You’re Doing?: follow-up Do you know what you’re doing? Maybe Not. In a remarkable archival study, Pelham and colleagues (2002: 474) found that “women were about 18% more likely to move to states with names resembling their first names than they should have been based on chance” — 36% more likely for the perfect matches Virginia and Continue reading Do You Know what You’re Doing? Thanks so much to everyone who has written in! There is a lot of food for thought in your postings, far too much to be digested in a short conclusion. I shall try to absorb them in the future rather than give half-baked comments now. One tiny correction: several readers picked up on the “middle-class” Continue reading Commercial Genome Reading: follow-up “What will commercial genome-reading – from cheap 23andMe to costly but complete Knome – do to middle-class conceptions of personal identity?” Say the name Knome out loud, not in one syllable but as two:– “know-me.” The corporation unabashedly offers “Know thyself” at the masthead of its Home Page. I accept the implied invitation to connect Continue reading Commercial genome reading |
|