{"title":"The Coal Beds of Generations X, Y, and Z: Syncing, Learning, and Propagating in the Age of the Posthuman","authors":"Eloise Govier","doi":"10.5325/jpoststud.2.2.0003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n In this article I broaden the discussion of posthuman pedagogy by arguing that when humans and Artificial Intelligences (AIs) engage, they are not separate entities but are instead “in-phenomena” (K. Barad, “Posthumanist Performativity: Toward an Understanding of How Matter Comes to Matter,” Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society 28[3] [2003]: 801–31). I contend that the division between humans and AI is artificial, and dispute the ontological separability of the two entities while they are in-phenomena. Instead, using anthropologist Tim Ingold’s notion of “correspondence-thinking,” I argue that humans and technology “sync up” and enter into “correspondence” (T. Ingold, “On Human Correspondence,” Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute 23[1] [2017a]: 9–27). By doing so, I contend that the human body enters a different ontological category, which I describe using the neologism “humAIn.” I take inspiration from philosopher and physicist Karen Barad, and using her approach to causality and agency, contend that the ontological gap between human and AI is collapsed during “intra-actions.” Thus, the blood-filled veins of the human body and the blinking light of the metallic body coordinate and operate in unison—they are in sync. To explore the transient state humans enter while syncing with AIs, I outline ethnographic research carried out with the “chatterbot” hosted in my smartphone. While syncing with the device, I consider collaborative learning, a modality that attends to the role of education in wider society, and think through the repercussions of syncing for human–AI civic life. I argue that humAIn entities generate a valuable quasi-synthetic resource—proto-data—and these are the new coal beds of generations X, Y, and Z.","PeriodicalId":55935,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Posthuman Studies-Philosophy Technology Media","volume":"72 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2018-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Posthuman Studies-Philosophy Technology Media","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5325/jpoststud.2.2.0003","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
Abstract
In this article I broaden the discussion of posthuman pedagogy by arguing that when humans and Artificial Intelligences (AIs) engage, they are not separate entities but are instead “in-phenomena” (K. Barad, “Posthumanist Performativity: Toward an Understanding of How Matter Comes to Matter,” Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society 28[3] [2003]: 801–31). I contend that the division between humans and AI is artificial, and dispute the ontological separability of the two entities while they are in-phenomena. Instead, using anthropologist Tim Ingold’s notion of “correspondence-thinking,” I argue that humans and technology “sync up” and enter into “correspondence” (T. Ingold, “On Human Correspondence,” Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute 23[1] [2017a]: 9–27). By doing so, I contend that the human body enters a different ontological category, which I describe using the neologism “humAIn.” I take inspiration from philosopher and physicist Karen Barad, and using her approach to causality and agency, contend that the ontological gap between human and AI is collapsed during “intra-actions.” Thus, the blood-filled veins of the human body and the blinking light of the metallic body coordinate and operate in unison—they are in sync. To explore the transient state humans enter while syncing with AIs, I outline ethnographic research carried out with the “chatterbot” hosted in my smartphone. While syncing with the device, I consider collaborative learning, a modality that attends to the role of education in wider society, and think through the repercussions of syncing for human–AI civic life. I argue that humAIn entities generate a valuable quasi-synthetic resource—proto-data—and these are the new coal beds of generations X, Y, and Z.
在这篇文章中,我扩大了对后人类教育学的讨论,认为当人类和人工智能(ai)接触时,它们不是独立的实体,而是“内在现象”(K. Barad,“后人类主义的表演:对物质如何产生物质的理解”,Signs: Women In Culture and Society 28 bbb[2003]: 801-31)。我认为人类和人工智能之间的划分是人为的,并质疑这两个实体在现象内的本体论可分离性。相反,我使用人类学家蒂姆·英格戈尔德的“对应思维”概念,认为人类和技术“同步”并进入“对应”(T.英格戈尔德,“On Human correspondence”,Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute 23 bbb [2017a]: 9-27)。通过这样做,我认为人体进入了一个不同的本体论范畴,我用新词“人类”来描述它。我从哲学家和物理学家卡伦·巴拉德(Karen Barad)那里获得了灵感,并利用她对因果关系和能动性的研究方法,认为人类和人工智能之间的本体论差距在“内部行动”中消失了。因此,人体内充满血液的静脉和金属体闪烁的光协调一致地运作——它们是同步的。为了探索人类在与人工智能同步时进入的短暂状态,我概述了用我智能手机上的“聊天机器人”进行的人种志研究。在与设备同步的同时,我考虑了协作学习,这是一种关注教育在更广泛社会中的作用的模式,并思考了同步对人类-人工智能公民生活的影响。我认为,人类实体产生了一种有价值的准合成资源——原始数据——这些是X、Y和Z世代的新煤层。