Archive for June, 2011
Being a brown skinned person, I’m regularly confronted by my like-skinned readerships to ask some derivative of the question “how are your philosophies on post human culture and technology relevant to people of color?”
In the non-White modernity, it seems that all PEST (political, economic, socio-cultural, technological) issues have an ethnic denominator. When thoughts on identity and progress are offered, whether they are technological or other, someone of the like-skinned faction of my reality is obligated to ask the aforementioned question. I’m aware that most people are far too busy surviving to ponder how the future will develop relative to the past, and because our technological growth has been so relatively slow, it is only intuitive for them all to think that PEST developments will occur in some linear state similar to that of the end of feudalism or slavery or the development of wheeled buggy into the automobile. But it won’t. The exponential growth of the past has been un-noticeable to the vast majority of society, but today it is all too evident. The very idea that conservatism can manage the attractive options available to people of any group (ethnic, gender, sexual, social, other) is naive.
For this essay to make any sense it is necessary to understand that there will always be a huge difference between the humans in the technological elite who have the ability to generate and consume large bodies of knowledge on history and futury as it relates to their social well being, and the other human beings who (for lack of resources…monetary and other) will live as we all did proceeding the 21st century.
The relevance of a particular ethnic group is relative. That’s a redundant quote, but its true. Everyone will likely cling to some group, not necessarily for survival, as it was so fashioned and critical in the past, but for likely more hedonistic purposes. In a reality where making addition to the physical being are as cliché as making additions one’s clothing, ethnic identifiers will be all but a blur. Gender identifies as well. I was recently at an exhibit called Embodied: Black Identities in American Art and Lorna Simpson’s piece Wigs that showed the many different types of identity characteristics black women in particular take on given their perception of popular culture…or rather the impression popular culture’s imposes.
As always (reference the Quakers), there are (and will likely always be) the naturalist movements of the world that embrace and empower peoples using what they’ve got as PEST assets, as opposed to what they can create or modify. But marketing/advertising trends per the technological elite is proving that the naturalist will remain a minority in competing space for grandeur and acceptance. Having stated that, it is to the technological elite’s benefit to convert those others, because two brain, fully functioning are better than one. Races like any other increasingly ambiguous genre should increase in volumes and decrease in consistent membership, much like the explosion in the music industry. Music proceeded Race and everything else for that matter as having expansive genres because of its ability to present liberal sounds/lyrics in a way that couldn’t offend our conservative legal or social structure. Ambiguities in sound and lyrics have never presented a systemic social problem, and therefore require no opposing conservative movements (other than “good” business).
Per physical attractions and political ascriptions, Race will seem like a fetish. As every data producing phenomena turns into an information technology, individuals will become better equipped to make decisions about how their lifestyle affects others within and far removed from their immediate degrees of separation. Simultaneously, these individuals will be compelled to be what is most beneficial to their situational desires. There will always be some differences in individuals co-existing and from that fundamental standpoint, there could technically be a Race assigned to every one of us. But, the relevance of a Race as a political check-point doesn’t logically propose any formidable pros/cons for anyone. Race is becoming irrelevant in the realm of the technological elite, survival is more about fluency-in and access-to technologies.
In a broader sense, Race could be defined to represent the individual’s group of acquaintances or geographic roots or , etc, etc… Given this, it could be difficult to define what a Race is. People of similar skin tone, hair texture, and geographic origins have been known and documented as being far removed from any familiarity with one another. I’m not going to rewrite what every sociologist and psychologist has already written here, but I would like to provoke more thought on what our realities will be like, as our degree of separation shrink, as a result of communicative technologies and a space like the internet….and as nano, bio, info technologies help us understand what’s important to our quality of life.
Thanks to our friends at the Singularity Hub for circulating this video earlier. Zion Eyez glasses will likely my next glasses purchase this year if they come out before any o the competitors that are supposedly unveiling a competitive product. The wonders that these glasses will do for transparency is just unimaginable….VIVA total transparency…when everything is cliche, little will be judged…and regardless of 2Pac’s lyrics…LOL…everyone but God is judging us based on what their grandparents think is politically correct.
Lately I’ve been taking a lot of lectures and podcasts on animal rights. For anyone “in the know” regarding our latest technological developments with synthetic DNA and cells coupled with out attempts to merge those with technologies seemingly more distant than from being what we know as human (homo sapien sapien), the regulatory and philosophical issues surrounding animal rights are urgent.
Consider how humans today are enthusiastic about enhancements of sorts to their physical and virtual being. Implants, prosthesis, medicines, computing powers, travel, ….our agility and fountain of youth…
Consider a near future where run-of-the-mill humans are simply inferior to those of us who decide (and can afford to) upgrade. Now consider how legal structure that’ll need to be built to manage the human species….ensuring that they don’t run-a-muck by over populating, over violating, overly interfering, and over representing themselves as valuable. Or will humans be valuable, and if so, in what capacity?
In an age of potential abundance and institutional scarcity (the current age) we are faced with the dilemma, to or not to identify less cognitively astute species as having rights. From a legal and point and attorney would tell you that rights are a privilege of a participating entity in a community, organization, nation/state of sort. It has been that way for centuries now, and is difficult to amend.
It’s always been necessary in (the attempt at) civil society to allocate rights to entities regardless of their societal status in order to avoid the (what some would call, natural) animal-istic virtue of respect. Anyone ever watched the animal channel where the Alpha in a pack or outside of a pack takes what it wants? Its due to a lack of formidable opposition by the others. The laws of society and cultural norms are not representative of the laws of the courts.
Humans are in the process of building species that will be more than capable of dominating in the aforementioned way. Defining rights and protecting them under laws is what keeps us from taking the Amish people’s land and doing what we please. We’ll require something similar for the bohemian naturalists of us out there, that no matter how sexy a trip to venus could be, they’ll never allow themselves the hedonistic good of downloading themselves into a body that travels at unthinkable speeds and distances, to see the rings.
So what do we do? Start protecting house pets and our food alike with the rights that we will soon have to allocate to our neighbors, or write them all off as less-than-valuable for a scientific study.
Most of the questions asked here are relevant in the topical debates on rights and animals today, but I’m of the group (if there exists such a group) that thinks, these questions aren’t addressing the root cause of this important issue affecting your parents and children. The argument that needs to be had is one of, how we value human abilities and what type of support (resources) we want to allocate to that potential. Its a conversation for elites and egalitarians, liberals and conservatives alike. And we’ve yet to address it will in civil society…lol @ civil,
Theory from our upcoming second publication will be published in the Religion and Spirituality in Society Journal
based on my economic incentive model which illustrates just how we all have the incentive to oppress each other while in a meager technological state. More to come….