Comments on: Blasphemous, Ironic Politics - The Effect of Cyborgs and Technological Culture on American Socialist Feminism http://eripsa.org/Phil101U1/2008/11/blasphemous-ironic-politics-the-effect-of-cyborgs-and-technological-culture-on-american-socialist-feminism/ Fall 2008 Sun, 14 Mar 2010 17:31:57 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.2 By: Daniel Estrada http://eripsa.org/Phil101U1/2008/11/blasphemous-ironic-politics-the-effect-of-cyborgs-and-technological-culture-on-american-socialist-feminism/#comment-840 Daniel Estrada Wed, 03 Dec 2008 23:44:31 +0000 http://eripsa.org/Phil101U1/?p=384#comment-840 Luke: Excellent response to a very good question. Ironically, Clark takes the natural-born cyborgs theory to be literally true, whereas he thinks that the post-modern treatment of cyborgs is mostly metaphorical. Luke: Excellent response to a very good question. Ironically, Clark takes the natural-born cyborgs theory to be literally true, whereas he thinks that the post-modern treatment of cyborgs is mostly metaphorical.

]]> By: Luke Kaiser http://eripsa.org/Phil101U1/2008/11/blasphemous-ironic-politics-the-effect-of-cyborgs-and-technological-culture-on-american-socialist-feminism/#comment-831 Luke Kaiser Wed, 03 Dec 2008 21:42:39 +0000 http://eripsa.org/Phil101U1/?p=384#comment-831 My understanding is that she believes she is a cyborg. She meets, at least, her first two definitions of a cyborg; she functions through a communication and control network and utilizes inorganic materials to improve her abilities (glasses, etc). By her definition, she is both a "cybernetic organism" and a "hybrid of machine and organism." The difference between Clark and Haraway seems not to be how they define cyborgs or how prevalent they consider them to be in our society, but in what they believe their definitions and statements imply. Clark stresses that the mind is different than we consider it to be, and uses the cyborg as a metaphor to illustrate his point. Cognitive systems, to him, "are best seen as proper parts of the computational apparatus that constitutes our minds," rather than the happenings within our skin-bag. Haraway, instead, focuses on the societal perceptions of the cyborgs themselves. The "border wars" of which she speaks aren't featured as prominently in Clark's work, although he must believe that at least a few exist. Certainly, her statement that modern machines "make ambiguous the difference between the natural and the artificial" meshes nicely with his views. My understanding is that she believes she is a cyborg. She meets, at least, her first two definitions of a cyborg; she functions through a communication and control network and utilizes inorganic materials to improve her abilities (glasses, etc). By her definition, she is both a “cybernetic organism” and a “hybrid of machine and organism.”

The difference between Clark and Haraway seems not to be how they define cyborgs or how prevalent they consider them to be in our society, but in what they believe their definitions and statements imply.

Clark stresses that the mind is different than we consider it to be, and uses the cyborg as a metaphor to illustrate his point. Cognitive systems, to him, “are best seen as proper parts of the computational apparatus that constitutes our minds,” rather than the happenings within our skin-bag.

Haraway, instead, focuses on the societal perceptions of the cyborgs themselves. The “border wars” of which she speaks aren’t featured as prominently in Clark’s work, although he must believe that at least a few exist. Certainly, her statement that modern machines “make ambiguous the difference between the natural and the artificial” meshes nicely with his views.

]]> By: Brad Thompson http://eripsa.org/Phil101U1/2008/11/blasphemous-ironic-politics-the-effect-of-cyborgs-and-technological-culture-on-american-socialist-feminism/#comment-809 Brad Thompson Wed, 03 Dec 2008 05:52:54 +0000 http://eripsa.org/Phil101U1/?p=384#comment-809 I suppose I'm a bit confused as to what Haraway is getting at. Does she share a view similar to Clark that we are all cyborgs now based on the fact that we have technology, such as glasses or a pace maker? Or based on her definition is Clark's view of a cyborg completely different. I guess what I"m asking is how different the definitions of a cyborg are between Clark and Haraway. I suppose I’m a bit confused as to what Haraway is getting at. Does she share a view similar to Clark that we are all cyborgs now based on the fact that we have technology, such as glasses or a pace maker? Or based on her definition is Clark’s view of a cyborg completely different. I guess what I”m asking is how different the definitions of a cyborg are between Clark and Haraway.

]]> By: Luke Kaiser http://eripsa.org/Phil101U1/2008/11/blasphemous-ironic-politics-the-effect-of-cyborgs-and-technological-culture-on-american-socialist-feminism/#comment-711 Luke Kaiser Fri, 21 Nov 2008 07:29:20 +0000 http://eripsa.org/Phil101U1/?p=384#comment-711 This text seemed more dense than Heidegger. It wasn't that her use of words was worse, she just has so many ideas and packs them into one another. Someone needs to reorganize her writing and strip it down to the basics. This text seemed more dense than Heidegger. It wasn’t that her use of words was worse, she just has so many ideas and packs them into one another. Someone needs to reorganize her writing and strip it down to the basics.

]]>