Group 1 (Jason, Etienne, Bastien, Mohannad, Brent, & Jon)
The continuous development in computer technology has increasingly posed a significant change on modern man’s thought process and perception on visual culture. Through the availability of cost-effective steadfast processor machines, to almost every society in the world, has resulted in a significant change on how man approaches problems and interprets visual language. Having been written at a period where man-computer interaction was at a far more greater distance than of today, J.C.R. Licklider’s text Man-Computer Symbiosis, written in 1960, approaches the notion of man-computer cooperative interaction, in an optimistic and hyperactive fashion, outlining both the benefits the machines will provide to man’s work ethic, and as well as the problems this relation would potentially face in the future; particularly through conflicts between two separately structured languages. A more recent text authored by Jewish philosopher Vilem Flusser “A New Imagination”, discusses the considerable psychological effect digitzed images respond to our extended memory and imagination through an in depth discussion of involved gestures. The following collective response will react to the ideologies expressed in both texts by Licklidler and Flusser, focusing on the discussed themes of objective representation, imagination, language and interaction, and whether or not the given biased arguments reflect the opinions and views of our group.
Writing my reaction and interpretation of this week’s readings in textual language would be far more difficult and challenging through the “old fashioned” writing utensil and/or typewriter. Having the instant availability to digital online dictionaries, encyclopedias, thesauruses, word-processing integrated spell and grammar check, and of course this weeks assigned readings available through a query search, I am working faster and thinking less than I would have been two decades ago. Attempting to perform this task through the conventional pencil and paper, I would feel limited and illiberal with my sentiments and thoughts. In Licklider’s text, the author suggests that “one of the main aims of man-computer symbiosis is to bring the computing machine effectively into the formulative parts of technical problems.” (Licklider, 74, 1960) Through the given perspective of the benefits of word processing, this envisioned aim, of a relatively close relationship between man and machine, has certainly been achieved. Effectively coordinating the technical aspects of my ideas, I feel more liberal to express what I need to express and how to express it, recognizing that I have all these helpful and beneficial technologies instantly available to me. It seems evident that the cooperative interaction between man and a computer would greatly improve the thinking process. Intended to help man in almost any developmental practice, this ‘symbiotic’ relation is certainly a strong one, but not as robust as Licklider might have suggested in his thesis fourty-six years ago:
This cooperative “living together in intimate association, or even close union of two dissimilar organisms is called symbiosis … The resulting partnership will think as no human brain has ever thought and process data in a way not approached buy there information-handling machine we know today. (Licklider, pp. 75-76, 1960)
Collectively, as a group we feel the way Licklider’s forecasts man-computer symbiosis is a bit utopic, and at certain occasions, contradictory. This contradiction resides in the idea of creating a flexible dependence. All existing symbiosis are related to animal behaviours and in each case the survival of each specie depends on the other specie. When two species depend on each others, to the point that when one fails to do what it was suppose to do, both species will become extinct. This fact alone does not make any type of dependence of this kind very flexible. It is naïve to think that if we let the machines make 85% of the thinking process, that our dependence of the machines will be flexible. Even if the machines makes 85% of the researches linked to the thinking process, will the process be more valuable or will it only be done faster? Their is a certain relation between planet earth and the humans versus the humans and the machines. The planet is our creator and we are the parasite living off the resources of our planet to survive. In a similar way, the humans are the creators of the machines and to the present day the machines have been parasites living off human resources to survive. The issue at the forefront is not how intimate this relationship is, but how feasible can this utmost dependency to the machine be for the best interest of mankind. The dissimilarity and difficulties in language and analytical thinking between man and machine will always place the human being as primary and above, for now at least.
As discussed, the machine has played a significant role on our work habits, lifestyle, and the matters in which we communicate our ideas. Characterized in Vilem Flusser’s essay “A New Imagination”, computers and the ideologies behind post-modernism jointly have had a considerable effect on the way we digest and absorb images. Flusser argues that images are damaging toward the perception of ourselves and the world around us, casting doubts on whether what we see is an actual object or simply just a pure idea: “Images are to be prohibited, because they alienate the human being out of necessity, driving him into the madness of idolatry and magical behavior.” (Flusser, 112) Reacting to our compounded memory and imagination, we reflect on our previous memories and past personal experiences to understand the images presented before us. Flusser explains the use of our ‘magical’ imagination as intentional gestures, objectively placing ourselves into the eye of the photographers subjectivity. The author’s contrast to the primary image, as a representation of the life world and the secondary duplicate as a mathematical calculation, raises a convincing argument. The levels of abstraction and the absence of aura, transcended through the digitally modified duplicated image, can no longer depict objectivity. Opening space for imaginary thought, the ‘two-dimensional’ image (taken out of the the ‘four dimensional world’), reflects on the realistic and/or non-realistic facts of our disbelief. Comparing our physical identity to an emotionally striking subjective image, it is imaginable why a good sense of fashion is obligatory in urban societies.
Writing my reaction and interpretation of this week’s readings in textual language would be far more difficult and challenging through the “old fashioned” writing utensil and/or typewriter. Having the instant availability to digital online dictionaries, encyclopedias, thesauruses, word-processing integrated spell and grammar check, and of course this weeks assigned readings available through a query search, I am working faster and thinking less than I would have been two decades ago. Attempting to perform this task through the conventional pencil and paper, I would feel limited and illiberal with my sentiments and thoughts. In Licklider’s text, the author suggests that “one of the main aims of man-computer symbiosis is to bring the computing machine effectively into the formulative parts of technical problems.” (Licklider, 74, 1960) Through the given perspective of the benefits of word processing, this envisioned aim, of a relatively close relationship between man and machine, has certainly been achieved. Effectively coordinating the technical aspects of my ideas, I feel more liberal to express what I need to express and how to express it, recognizing that I have all these helpful and beneficial technologies instantly available to me. It seems evident that the cooperative interaction between man and a computer would greatly improve the thinking process. Intended to help man in almost any developmental practice, this ‘symbiotic’ relation is certainly a strong one, but not as robust as Licklider might have suggested in his thesis fourty-six years ago:
This cooperative “living together in intimate association, or even close union of two dissimilar organisms is called symbiosis … The resulting partnership will think as no human brain has ever thought and process data in a way not approached buy there information-handling machine we know today. (Licklider, pp. 75-76, 1960)
Collectively, as a group we feel the way Licklider’s forecasts man-computer symbiosis is a bit utopic, and at certain occasions, contradictory. This contradiction resides in the idea of creating a flexible dependence. All existing symbiosis are related to animal behaviours and in each case the survival of each specie depends on the other specie. When two species depend on each others, to the point that when one fails to do what it was suppose to do, both species will become extinct. This fact alone does not make any type of dependence of this kind very flexible. It is naïve to think that if we let the machines make 85% of the thinking process, that our dependence of the machines will be flexible. Even if the machines makes 85% of the researches linked to the thinking process, will the process be more valuable or will it only be done faster? Their is a certain relation between planet earth and the humans versus the humans and the machines. The planet is our creator and we are the parasite living off the resources of our planet to survive. In a similar way, the humans are the creators of the machines and to the present day the machines have been parasites living off human resources to survive. The issue at the forefront is not how intimate this relationship is, but how feasible can this utmost dependency to the machine be for the best interest of mankind. The dissimilarity and difficulties in language and analytical thinking between man and machine will always place the human being as primary and above, for now at least.
As discussed, the machine has played a significant role on our work habits, lifestyle, and the matters in which we communicate our ideas. Characterized in Vilem Flusser’s essay “A New Imagination”, computers and the ideologies behind post-modernism jointly have had a considerable effect on the way we digest and absorb images. Flusser argues that images are damaging toward the perception of ourselves and the world around us, casting doubts on whether what we see is an actual object or simply just a pure idea: “Images are to be prohibited, because they alienate the human being out of necessity, driving him into the madness of idolatry and magical behavior.” (Flusser, 112) Reacting to our compounded memory and imagination, we reflect on our previous memories and past personal experiences to understand the images presented before us. Flusser explains the use of our ‘magical’ imagination as intentional gestures, objectively placing ourselves into the eye of the photographers subjectivity. The author’s contrast to the primary image, as a representation of the life world and the secondary duplicate as a mathematical calculation, raises a convincing argument. The levels of abstraction and the absence of aura, transcended through the digitally modified duplicated image, can no longer depict objectivity. Opening space for imaginary thought, the ‘two-dimensional’ image (taken out of the the ‘four dimensional world’), reflects on the realistic and/or non-realistic facts of our disbelief. Comparing our physical identity to an emotionally striking subjective image, it is imaginable why a good sense of fashion is obligatory in urban societies.
posted by jason at 8:25 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home