[-empyre-] Re: Writing Culture
Re: Writing Culture
Seaman:
Humankind has chosen differing metaphors in history to point at their
nature. At one time it was the pump, at another time it was
clockwork, and currently computers are a prevalent metaphor (amongst
others). [see Hayles below]
The question is, is the body a computer or machine-like in some capacity?
There is not a computer that currently has the complexity of the body
- far from it. Yet, one can glean operative principles from the body
- analogues, and work toward making an "intelligent" machine, or work
toward emulating some of the functional aspects of the body, by
abstracting knowledge of the body's functionality.
By attempting to study the body in this way , we often learn more
about its deep complexity- more about ourselves. It is in this light
that I am interested in working toward making "intelligent" systems.
In a sense this becomes a form of a "writing of analogues of the
body," in part through code - as well as through developing embodied
systems that enable a deep contextual knowledge, that learn, that
employ "natural" language, that come to have a strong intermingling
with environment - that are situated. The ability of a machine to
achieve (or emulate) these bodily attributes is on the horizon. So if
we currently say the body is a computer or sorts, then we have to say
we haven't as yet manufactured one (a computer) with near the
complexity. It may be in the distant future that computers that once
emulated the complexity of the body will transcend that complexity.
[the name computer comes from people who compute... Babbage/Lovelace
were attempting to mechanize this activity in terms of the attempted
functionality of the first computers][[see also Agree on the negative
aspects of Babbage]]
So the study of the body informs the production of new computers, and
new computers often inform how we begin to look back at the body -
they illuminate bodily functions through their difference (and
similarities) from the body. We will never make an exact replica of a
machinic body through analogues. We may however enable the
construction of devices which in the long run have sentient-like,
creative qualities. [See See Bar-Cohen, Yoseph and Breazeal,
Cynthia, Biologically Inspired Robots, SPIE Press, Washington, 2003
for a state of the art look at bio-mimetic systems]
So the project of seeking to "write the analogical body" via code
functioning with other physical mechanisms (and in particular the
abstraction of portions or fragments of these emulations back into
more traditional computing systems) will no doubt inform the nature
of electronic writing as it enables the writer to extend their
cretive potentials in new ways via code authorship.
----
The micro levels will become increasingly important, and the
potential to operate on the micro levels be it through code,
nano-technology, new forms of bio-technology, new studies of
endophysics, automata theory etc. will become a major branch of
study. [This is not to say that there will not be an ethics to such
mechanisms, on the contrary we need to be socially and critically
aware that such "writerly' mechanisms that are already under
construction, often for non-humanitarian reasons...]
The challenge will be to develop new forms of digital creation that
will enable people to explore differing levels of authorship through
intelligent-object-based modular systems of construction. A second
challenge will be in developing language where people from different
disciplines can talk to each other about what the potentials of such
systems might be, and alternately incorporating these potentials into
the new object-based code construction environments. The third will
be in making intelligent systems that also become authors (exhibit
creativity through the emulation of human behavior) [this may enable
very powerful human/machine symbiotic-like inter-authorship modes] as
well as illuminate authorship via displacement; . The forth challenge
will relate to being socially/critically aware of how these systems
affect our coming to know the world.
b
ja said:
this realization of the intimate nature of language will have propogated
from the micro to the macro levels, so that there will be a notion of the
reality of writing without design at the macro levels of the universe.
writing in the sense that non-conscious processes like computers can both be
governed by and give rise to language that, in turn, like solular inimita,
can generate higher levels of complex organization in things. but also
non-human made things can 'evolve' in this way.
Hayles Quote (see :
http://www2.humlab.umu.se/events/humlabseminariet_ht2005_hayles.htm
discussion by katherine hayles of macro intimata, ie, reality as virtual)
Mathematician Stephan Wolfram has recently proposed that many
different kinds of complex systems, including human thought and
action, can be modeled using cellular automata. These very simple
computational systems have demonstrated that they are capable of
generating complex patterns using simple rules. According to
physicist Ed Fredkin, cellular automata underlie physical reality
on a subatomic level; in his view, nature itself is software
running on a Universal Computer. This presentation will look
critically at these claims, asking whether we should consider them
as physical models or as over-determined metaphors that would
inevitably emerge in a historical period when computation is
pervasive. This issue, and its proliferating implications, will be
explored through Greg Egan's print novel Permutation City, which
imagines a world in which it is possible to simulate a person's
consciousness inside a computer, creating a Copy that has all the
personality and memories of the original.
--
Professor Bill Seaman, Ph.D.
Department Head
Digital+ Media Department (Graduate Division)
Rhode Island School of Design
Two College St.
Providence, R.I. 02903-4956
401 277 4956
fax 401 277 4966
bseaman@risd.edu
http://billseaman.com
http://www.art.235media.de/index.php?show=2