#cyborg anthropology

[afutureworththinkingabout]

Appendix A: An Imagined and Incomplete Conversation about “Consciousness” and “AI,” Across Time

Every so often, I think about the fact of one of the best things my advisor and committee members let me write and include in my actual doctoral dissertation, and I smile a bit, and since I keep wanting to share it out into the world, I figured I should put it somewhere more accessible.

So with all of that said, we now rejoin An Imagined and Incomplete Conversation about “Consciousness” and “AI,” Across Time, already (still, seemingly unendingly) in progress:

René Descartes (1637): The physical and the mental have nothing to do with each other. Mind/soul is the only real part of a person.

Norbert Wiener (1948): I don’t know about that “only real part” business, but the mind is absolutely the seat of the command and control architecture of information and the ability to reflexively reverse entropy based on context, and input/output feedback loops.

Alan Turing (1952): Huh. I wonder if what computing machines do can reasonably be considered thinking?

Wiener: I dunno about “thinking,” but if you mean “pockets of decreasing entropy in a framework in which the larger mass of entropy tends to increase,” then oh for sure, dude.

John Von Neumann (1958): Wow things sure are changing fast in science and technology; we should maybe slow down and think about this before that change hits a point beyond our ability to meaningfully direct and shape it— a singularity, if you will.

Clynes & Klines (1960): You know, it’s funny you should mention how fast things are changing because one day we’re gonna be able to have automatic tech in our bodies that lets us pump ourselves full of chemicals to deal with the rigors of space; btw, have we told you about this new thing we’re working on called “antidepressants?”

Gordon Moore (1965): Right now an integrated circuit has 64 transistors, and they keep getting smaller, so if things keep going the way they’re going, in ten years they’ll have 65 THOUSAND. :-O

Donna Haraway (1991): We’re all already cyborgs bound up in assemblages of the social, biological, and techonological, in relational reinforcing systems with each other. Also do you like dogs?

Ray Kurzweil (1999): Holy Shit, did you hear that?! Because of the pace of technological change, we’re going to have a singularity where digital electronics will be indistinguishable from the very fabric of reality! They’ll be part of our bodies! Our minds will be digitally uploaded immortal cyborg AI Gods!

Tech Bros: Wow, so true, dude; that makes a lot of sense when you think about it; I mean maybe not “Gods” so much as “artificial super intelligences,” but yeah.

90’s TechnoPagans: I mean… Yeah? It’s all just a recapitulation of The Art in multiple technoscientific forms across time. I mean (*takes another hit of salvia*) if you think about the timeless nature of multidimensional spiritual architectures, we’re already—

DARPA: Wait, did that guy just say something about “Uploading” and “Cyborg/AI Gods?” We got anybody working on that?? Well GET TO IT!

Disabled People, Trans Folx, BIPOC Populations, Women: Wait, so our prosthetics, medications, and relational reciprocal entanglements with technosocial systems of this world in order to survive makes us cyborgs?! :-O

[Simultaneously:]

Kurzweil/90’s TechnoPagans/Tech Bros/DARPA: Not like that. Wiener/Clynes & Kline: Yes, exactly.

Haraway: I mean it’s really interesting to consider, right?

Tech Bros: Actually, if you think about the bidirectional nature of time, and the likelihood of simulationism, it’s almost certain that there’s already an Artificial Super Intelligence, and it HATES YOU; you should probably try to build it/never think about it, just in case.

90’s TechnoPagans: …That’s what we JUST SAID.

Philosophers of Religion (To Each Other): …Did they just Pascal’s Wager Anselm’s Ontological Argument, but computers?

Timnit Gebru and other “AI” Ethicists: Hey, y’all? There’s a LOT of really messed up stuff in these models you started building.

Disabled People, Trans Folx, BIPOC Populations, Women: Right?

Anthony Levandowski: I’m gonna make an AI god right now! And a CHURCH!

The General Public: Wait, do you people actually believe this?

Microsoft/Google/IBM/Facebook: …Which answer will make you give us more money?

Timnit Gebru and other “AI” Ethicists: …We’re pretty sure there might be some problems with the design architectures, too…

Some STS Theorists: Honestly this is all a little eugenics-y— like, both the technoscientific and the religious bits; have you all sought out any marginalized people who work on any of this stuff? Like, at all??

Disabled People, Trans Folx, BIPOC Populations, Women: Hahahahah! …Oh you’re serious?

Anthony Levandowski: Wait, no, nevermind about the church.

Some “AI” Engineers: I think the things we’re working on might be conscious, or even have souls.

“AI” Ethicists/Some STS Theorists: Anybody? These prejudices???

Wiener/Tech Bros/DARPA/Microsoft/Google/IBM/Facebook: “Souls?” Pfffft. Look at these whackjobs, over here. “Souls.” We’re talking about the technological singularity, mind uploading into an eternal digital universal superstructure, and the inevitability of timeless artificial super intelligences; who said anything about “Souls?”

René Descartes/90’s TechnoPagans/Philosophers of Religion/Some STS Theorists/Some “AI” Engineers: …

[Scene]

----------- ----------- ----------- -----------

Read Appendix A: An Imagined and Incomplete Conversation about “Consciousness” and “AI,” Across Time at A Future Worth Thinking About

and read more of this kind of thing at: Williams, Damien Patrick. Belief, Values, Bias, and Agency: Development of and Entanglement with "Artificial Intelligence." PhD diss., Virginia Tech, 2022. https://vtechworks.lib.vt.edu/handle/10919/111528.

[bellshazes]

my first two jobs ever, in order, were "board game teacher" and "university library assistant," so tho I've never formally studied games (I have been dropping out of college on and off since 2015, and was a freshman in 2012 lmao) I've been casually exposed to games and the people who make and play them in a professional context, as well as having the research skills to help close the gaps. i actually kind of hate playing board games but i loved GM-ing the coop arkham horror and watching my players, which i did for seven years straight.

my current fixation is the result of several years' fucking around on YT watching all kinds of game content, from LPs to specific game dissection to video essayists. jacob geller and folding ideas are kind of gold standards, but this week I've been really enjoying errant signals in particular. Sometimes I'm introduced to concepts this way - ludonarrative dissonance, ergodic literature, the magic circle, etc. that, and getting recommendations from friends or accidentally stumbling into game studies via other research (such as the paper i wrote a few years ago on theater-as-games in prison contexts). most of it though is having thoughts and opinions on things and letting it percolate until i am dangerous enough to find someone who's already explained a concept better than I could, and then running with that. find something that cites its sources, and then chase the ones that seem interesting.

my syllabus post is very much not a reclist, though i do in varying ways recommend everything on that list and it might be of use. here's some stuff I think would be great starting points:

Rules of Play - Game Design Fundamentals, Salen and Zimmerman. This book is an excellent resource, as it introduces a wide variety of scholars who you can dive into as it is relevant to your interests as well as providing tons of useful frameworks and vocabulary to go hunting. It's an easy read with concise bullet-point summaries after each chapter, and the PDF is hyperlinked for easy navigation. I might have found this via Wikipedia, honestly.

A Play of Bodies: A Phenomenology of Video Game Experience, Keogh. What I'm currently liveblogging - it is firmly a literary/philosophical work, rather than by/for designers, and correspondingly it's a little more difficult without at least passing familiarity with cyborg theory or any brand or offshoot of post-modernism, but still fairly digestible and a great read so far.

My Life as a Night Elf Priest: An Anthropological Account of World of Warcraft, Nardi. Found this during my theater-and-games paper, and MMO anthropology is not really my thing, but it's a nice complement to the other books as an explicitly player-theorist perspective. Also provides a more approachable introduction to a variety of theorists and sources. (Open access on JSTOR!)

Draw Your Weapons, Sarah Sentilles. I'm biased because I discovered this book by accidentally attending an author event at my local museum, and the games portion is incidental, but if you can find it I think this analysis of the relationship between depictions of violence and violence itself is worth your time. Memorable re: games for its discussion of Press F To Pay Respects.

here are some videos which I offer as examples of channels you might enjoy diving into, looking for additional jumping-off points:

Playing as Anyone in Watch Dogs Legion, Errant Signal. I really appreciate Errant Signal's thoughtful, personal approach to analysis and especially his highlighting of buried gems in his Blips series as well as his non-self-deprecating reevaluation of some of his older analyses over his decade plus career making videos.

Controllers Control Everything, Game Makers Toolkit. Discovered via the Boss Keys series highlighting the souls games, and although I think his channel is (increasingly) geared toward devs, these are well-constructed, thoughtful videos about many aspects of game design. Even when I don't personally get what makes him enjoy Zelda dungeons in that specific way (I'm an outlier), I appreciate his analysis.

Mega Microvideos 2, Matthewmatosis. Perhaps better known for his extremely long-form essays, I love Matthewmatosis' series of microessays framed like Wario Ware minigames. They are brief but don't pull punches, and the format is uniquely delightful. (See also this microessay mixtape.)

Making Sense of Catherine Full Body, SuperButterBuns. She doesn't do much essay content, I guess, but I she loves Catherine and the Persona series, and this dissection of Catherine Full Body is an absolute treat.

Jon Bois. Okay, mostly not about games, but like - come on. 17776 and Breaking Madden, alongside everything else he's ever done, fit because I feel like they do. If nothing else, I think Pretty Good and his general use of Google Earth as a medium for storytelling have a lot of utility in talking about digital media. He's good for the soul.

The Future of Writing About Games, Jacob Geller. One of the gold standards for a reason - and especially if you're looking for further solid recommendations for other writing/creating about games. This video in particular discusses & links to some really great pieces, but his Big List of Other People's Video Essays is also a great way to spend the next month of your life. (You might notice some crossover between this list and his, only some of which is coincidental.)

if i have any conclusion, it's that my current fixation on digital literalism is me finally finding an outlet/academic match-up with a fascination i developed in 2015 when studying gonzo lit. i think the utility of academia and the long history of scholarship on a given topic, as a non-academic, is to help you express ideas or reinterpret beliefs or experiences you've had to others without having to reinvent the wheel. i always become most energized when i stop worrying about knowing all the bg and chase whatever is useful and affirming or enlightening to me. and you can get pretty far if you think about why you like what you do, and just - enthusiastically also consume non-academic stuff. maybe this is a note more for myself! but thank you for the opportunity to monologue.

[sinkableruby]

Thoughts on how technology is depicted in anime?

i dont have thoughts per se i have a tangled mess of impressions from an an anime anthropology class i took once. it has to do with the nuclear bombs, the terror of that technology, and like... the projected inhumanity of cyborgs, i guess.

[frank-olivier]

The Observational Spectrum: From Empiricism to Embodiment in UAP Studies

The study of Unidentified Aerial Phenomena (UAP) stands at a critical juncture, confronting the complexities of merging diverse methodologies to comprehend a phenomenon that resists straightforward categorization. Recent scholarly discussions, notably Maya Owen's lecture and supplementary examinations of eyewitness testimony, scientific observation, and embodied experiences in UAP research, underscore the imperative of an interdisciplinary approach. This necessitates a nuanced exploration of the disciplinary divide, the pivotal role of embodied experiences, and the transformative potential of bridging methodologies to enhance our understanding of UAP.

The dichotomy between "nuts and bolts" (emphasizing physical evidence and material issues, grounded in hard sciences) and "embodied" (encompassing experiential, spiritual, and religious aspects, aligning with social sciences and humanities) approaches in UAP studies poses a significant challenge. While empirical validation is crucial, overlooking the profound personal and existential implications of UAP encounters can result in an incomplete understanding. Conversely, an "embodied" focus, without scientific rigor, risks lacking credibility. This dichotomy is not insurmountable; rather, it presents an opportunity for scholarly innovation.

Embodied experiences are indispensable in UAP research, offering first-hand accounts that can inform scientific investigation and highlighting the complex, often transformative, nature of UAP encounters. The integration of these experiences challenges traditional methodologies, necessitating an adaptation that accommodates subjective, yet potentially revelatory, aspects of human experience. Concepts like "Uncanny Science" and "Flip" provide a theoretical framework for reconciling the scientific with the experiential, suggesting that the intersection of science and spirituality can be a fertile ground for understanding UAP. This reconciliation is not about diminishing scientific rigor but about enhancing it with the depth and complexity of human experience.

A holistic approach to UAP studies, one that synergistically combines the empirical with the experiential, is the most promising path forward. This can be facilitated through the adoption of frameworks like Cyborg Anthropology, which recognizes the interplay between human experiencers, technology, and the sensory extensions afforded by instruments. Moreover, the development of standardized methodologies for collecting and analyzing experiential data can significantly enhance the credibility and utility of embodied accounts in scientific research. Encouraging cross-disciplinary dialogue and collaboration is equally crucial, fostering a more comprehensive understanding of UAP that addresses both its material and experiential dimensions.

The study of UAP is poised to redefine the boundaries of scientific inquiry and our understanding of human experience. By embracing an interdisciplinary approach that values empirical evidence, embodied experiences, and the transformative potential of their integration, UAP research can transcend current disciplinary limitations. This integration promises not only a deeper grasp of UAP phenomena but also contributes to a broader shift in understanding the interconnectedness of human experience, technology, and the unknown, thereby enriching the scholarly landscape.

Maya Cowan: Observatories and Experiencers (The Society For UAP Studies, Annual Summer Conference 2024, Varieties and Trajectories of Contemporary UAP Studies, August 2024)

Sunday, February 9, 2025

[tired-and-unjellied]

Okay, I have to elaborate on the tags unless I want it to live rent-free in my head.

Im'Vro would love to work on mechs. The big stuff. Currently, he's stuck fixing containers and ship hulls. A cyborg/android would be like a miniature mech, and as long as the parts aren't too small, it would work.

Meanwhile, Luther would like fixing and tampering with a cyborg or android. In fact, he might have applied to be a repairman for the GOC cyborg teams if things were a bit different. He would work on cyberFelix, but he would also be mad Felix still ignored him and the two others saying it would be a bad idea.

Luther would mention the cost and difficulty of fixing a cyborg vs. a slimefolk/human. Hector would mention they would be at the mercy of the manufacturer for parts, system upgrades, and might get ransomed or outright abandoned in the company goes under. Brian would mention the anthropology falacy: the bionic brain is vastly different to an organic one; and it would alter the owner's cognition to the point that they might not be the same person.

But he would still love to handle the repairs and upgrades in-between missions. But he would really be mad the guy that could get crushed by a truck or exploded by a reality wrapper and reform within minutes just decide to throw it all away for something that not only won't reform, but also will be expensive to rebuild.

Unfortunately, Im'Vro and Felix/Luther are from different universes and even times (3000s vs 2000s). And in the AU, Im'Vro and Luther are together, Felix isn't (or at least, not now).

ok, but, cyborg x mechanic that loves to fix them

no further experimentation than just improving or fixing them

sometimes you see the cyborg without a limb or two, just waiting patiently or getting a bit angry (faking it)

[sciencesideanswers]

how many parts have to be added on to a human for them to be considered part cyborg? would strapping a tablet onto your arm make you part cyborg, or would you have to attach it permanently? Would a cyborg eye instead of a glass eye make you part cyborg? what if the cyborg eye is removable? sorry, i have a lot of questions

These are important questions! The ones that define what it means to be human and what it means to be … machine?

Anyways, to make a long story short: there is no clear and definite answer.

To start with, there are different interpretations of what it means to be a cyborg. To some people, you need to have a permanent body part made of technology to be considered one (which would give a clear answer to your question), but some others consider that we are already there, except that instead of body parts, we rely on technology in our day to day, enhancing our abilities and extending our lives -- hence, we are all already cyborgs.

But also, what about the digital life: do you consider your digital presence an extension of who you are? Even if it doesn’t have your name, your real-picture avatar, your physical presence, it’s still a part of you that impacts you and others, so in a sense, it is you. Is that digital presence a way of interaction with others only possible because of technology? The answer is yes, and so far, it would not be enough to consider yourself a cyborg (imagine a cat pawing at a tablet: not a cyborg). But because it’s part of your life and how you experience it, it might be part of you too. So… very debatable. This whole discussion is under the umbrella term of Cyborg Anthropology, something still quite new and under debate.

There have been humans that had taken the extra step, like Neil Harbisson, who had an antenna implanted on him to “hear” colors, and is now able to sense more colors than the regular human. You will find him mentioned as the first “official” cyborg, but I couldn’t find any good explanations of what made it official, aside from the government allowing him to have his implant in his passport photo.

Rob Spencer is another one ([1], [2]), who lost one of his eyes and replaced it with a video camera.

It is very clear that we would call them “cyborgs” -- but there are lots of biohacking techniques that fall in the blurry line on whether it is not so clear.

And finally, you have people that make use of medical devices, for therapeutic, cosmetic or enhancing reasons. I myself use glasses almost 24/7 -- am I a cyborg because I rely on technology to enhance a sense that nature didn’t give me? What about people with cochlear implants? What about Oscar Pistorious, the “Blade Runner”, who using blade-style prosthetic legs had an olympic-level running ability? As a paper on Deaf Culture and Cyborg politics puts it: “It is impossible to reduce Cyborg politics to any clear position” ([3] [4])

One last thing: there are several futurists like Ray Kurzweil, that claim that this distinction will later fade away ([5]). We will call all of us “humans”, and will pay no further attention to whether there is technology inside us or not, similar to how we don’t pay much attention to whether we’re surrounded by technology in our cities.

In my personal opinion: everything that you said would make yourself a cyborg. So cyborg away!

– Alpha

Support us on Patreon

[technoccult]

Cyborg Theology and An Anthropology of Robots and AI

Scott Midson's Cyborg Theology and Kathleen Richardson's An Anthropology of Robots and AI both trace histories of technology and human-machine interactions, and both make use of fictional narratives as well as other theoretical techniques. The goal of Midson's book is to put forward a new understanding of what it means to be human, an understanding to supplant the myth of a perfect "Edenic" state and the various disciplines' dichotomous oppositions of "human" and "other." This new understanding, Midson says, exists at the intersection of technological, theological, and ecological contexts,and he argues that an understanding of the conceptual category of the cyborg can allow us to understand this assemblage in a new way. That is, all of the categories of "human," "animal," "technological," "natural," and more are far more porous than people tend to admit and their boundaries should be challenged; this understanding of the cyborg gives us the tools to do so. Richardson, on the other hand, seeks to argue that what it means to be human has been devalued by the drive to render human capacities and likenesses into machines, and that this drive arises from the male-dominated and otherwise socialized spaces in which these systems are created. The more we elide the distinction between the human and the machine, the more we will harm human beings and human relationships. Midson's training is in theology and religious studies, and so it's no real surprise that he primarily uses theological exegesis (and specifically an exegesis of Genesis creation stories), but he also deploys the tools of cyborg anthropology (specifically Donna Haraway's 1991 work on cyborgs), sociology, anthropology, and comparative religious studies. He engages in interdisciplinary narrative analysis and comparison,exploring the themes from several pieces of speculative fiction media and the writings of multiple theorists from several disciplines.

Read the rest of Cyborg Theology and An Anthropology of Robots and AI at Technoccult

[sapphicfandompirate]

Luffy-Command Red

Zoro-Security/tactical Yellow, or first officer red

Nami- Conn, Yellow (I think that's navigation, I always get conn/ops/helm confused). Or first officer red

Usopp -Engineering Yellow

Sanji- Chef/Bartender/Quartermaster? I'm not sure of this gets a color, yellow?

Chopper- Medical Blue

Robin - Science Blue (Anthropology & Archaeology officer. This was a position on TOS and TNG)

Franky- Engineering yellow, is still a cyborg , kind of like Rutherford, and wears a skant

Brook- Maybe communication? Red TOS era, Blue Ent era. Definitely organized several concerts

Jinbei-Helmsmen, which I think is Red

Bonus:

Yamato- Security Yellow, or maybe red command? He is probably is here for the exploration like Luffy lmao

Carrot- Conn/Ops Yellow

Vivi- Ambassador, or ships counselor (medical blue)

Mystified how theres no one piece x star trek aus on here LIKE SIMILARITIES THE POTENTIAL i thought for sure someone out there has a silly little drawing of the strawhats on a trek ship bridge or the enterprise crew in funky op fashion

You could even get away with actual crossover without drastically altering the rules of either canon smh

[ethtropy]

In order to complete our #CyborgAnthropology posts, let’s focus on #DonnaHaraway’s classical text “A Manifesto for Cyborgs: Science, Technology, and Socialist Feminism in the 1980s”, which was first published by #SocialistReview in 1985, and can be found in the essay collection “Simians, Cyborgs, and Women: The Reinvention of Nature”.

[afutureworththinkingabout]

Master and Servant: Disciplinarity and the Implications of AI and Cyborg Identity

Much of my research deals with the ways in which bodies are disciplined and how they go about resisting that discipline. In this piece, adapted from one of the answers to my PhD preliminary exams written and defended two months ago, I "name the disciplinary strategies that are used to control bodies and discuss the ways that bodies resist those strategies." Additionally, I address how strategies of embodied control and resistance have changed over time, and how identifying and existing as a cyborg and/or an artificial intelligence can be understood as a strategy of control, resistance, or both. In Jan Golinski’s Making Natural Knowledge, he spends some time discussing the different understandings of the word “discipline” and the role their transformations have played in the definition and transmission of knowledge as both artifacts and culture. In particular, he uses the space in section three of chapter two to discuss the role Foucault has played in historical understandings of knowledge, categorization, and disciplinarity. Using Foucault’s work in Discipline and Punish, we can draw an explicit connection between the various meanings “discipline” and ways that bodies are individually, culturally, and socially conditioned to fit particular modes of behavior, and the specific ways marginalized peoples are disciplined, relating to their various embodiments. This will demonstrate how modes of observation and surveillance lead to certain types of embodiments being deemed “illegal” or otherwise unacceptable and thus further believed to be in need of methodologies of entrainment, correction, or reform in the form of psychological and physical torture, carceral punishment, and other means of institutionalization.

[(Locust, "Master and Servant (Depeche Mode Cover)"]

Read the rest of Master and Servant: Disciplinarity and the Implications of AI and Cyborg Identity at A Future Worth Thinking About

[eye-of-the-cyborg]

I managed to upload my beta version of my virtual reality self-hypnosis experience in 360 on youtube this can be accessed through the app.

Upon embarking on my MA studies I quickly began to reflect on my practice as a digital artist and designer. I entered the world of education so that I could remove myself from the monotony of my daily computer use from when I was a designer. I realised that technology has always been a huge facet of my practice and that selling my proverbial soul and working on commercial graphics/animation had robbed me of the enthusiasm I had for the technological world. This neo-Luddite style existence forced me to shun technology and work more on traditional techniques such as painting and drawing.

This love-hate relationship with technology has always been the foundation of my practice and has fuelled my research so far. Through my MA studies, I have realised that the future is going to be ever more digital and it is up to designers and programmers to create future technologies with the intention to best serve mankind rather than perpetuate the more negative sides of society. I believe technology has the power to aid humankind in ways we are yet to discover I also understand that it has the potential to decimate society and plummet us into a digital-dependent dystopian future, where we can't escape the addictive thrall of our devices. I want to further my research to attempt to achieve a better future, however, the ambiguity of our digital futures is what keeps it interesting.

"It is the business of the future to be dangerous, and it is under the merits of science that it equips the future for its duties" (Whitehead, 2011)

[tastesoftamriel]

Are you a transhumanist? Do you believe in improving life with cutting edge technology, or stopping death? Does the concept of biohacking excite you? Would you mess around with your genes in a lab or sew a magnet into your hand to become a real life cyborg? Are you a real life cyborg? I NEED YOU FOR RESEARCH!

If you are a transhumanist, I'm looking to interview you about spiritualism and your attitudes towards capitalism and neoliberalism. This will be a Zoom interview of around an hour, conducted some time in the next two months (this may change depending on how research goes).

Unfortunately as I am not getting paid as far as I'm aware (ah to be an academic), I am unable to offer financial compensation for your time, but if you'd like to contribute to a nice little piece of anthropology anyway please inbox me! ~Tal

Also please feel free to forward this post around! I'd appreciate any help in finding participants for my study 💖

[happyleakira]

im SUPPOSED to be writing the long-ass band AU I had planned... but here I am at midnight, getting suddenly inspired to ditch that idea and turn out 5k of cyborg AU instead

[good-wine-and-cheese]

Hello, I hope you're doing well.

You get a lot of questions about the cast of Monster and their opinions on things, so here is my question: their favourite ____punk genre (e.g. steampunk, dieselpunk)?

Alternatively, are there any characters you associate with a particular one, even if it may not be to their taste?

Thank you~ well, but tired lol! This is a really fun one :) as a super huge steampunk vibes liker I appreciate it a ton.

Kenzo Tenma: While in general I don't see him being especially into the genre (let's face it he has never had the time to have special interests!) I do think if presented with each of these genres of media he would be a fan of something like solar punk, something about the brighter, cleaner nature to the world that it presents. More hopeful.

Wolfgang Grimmer: From the subgenres that I know, I would say Grimmer would take the most intrigue with diesel punk. I imagine he would be drawn to it for the period of time it represents, during a lot of overt incivility spanning through world war. It's a bleaker world that he finds fascination with. Far enough back that he can look at it as a fiction, but still relatable enough to draw him in.

Eva Heinemann: Now Eva's definitely a straightforward steampunk fan for sure. It's got her aesthetic, she would see herself as a part of the wealthy upper class, and I think she'd enjoy the decor and fashion for the genre. There's lots to love.

Heinrich Lunge: This one I was caught between diesel punk and cyberpunk. I think that Lunge personally would be more drawn toward diesel punk, for some similar reasons as to Grimmer - the bleak crime-riddled world of it, the period of time it represents, etc. - but I definitely associate him more with cyberpunk for reasons that should be fairly clear. Something something the hard drive in my brain...

Nina Fortner: So, there were a couple I could choose, but the one I think Nina would have a lot of fun with is raypunk. It's got a classic old-timey vibe, but in a fun, bright atmospheric way that's super colourful and has a lot of vibrant energy. I think she'd like that! Partly to enjoy what the 50s saw the future as (lol) and partly just for the overall bright aesthetic of it. It's bold and a lot of fun.

Johan Liebert: While I don't think he would much care for the genre, there's something about the idea behind clock punk that might draw him in. It's close to steampunk, but with more focus on the clockwork element, and I think the endless passage of time through a steampunk lens would draw him. Something about time being frozen within the confines of the world, but endlessly passing simultaneously.

Jan Suk: I feel like he'd be a fan of desert punk. He's a fan of old cop shows, and desert punk is the realm of harsher, wild wild west type of worlds where that kind of story would thrive. I bet he would love to see himself as a tough young sheriff in that kind of narrative.

Rudi Gillen: I think he'd have some fun with the notions of biopunk. It has some of the same narrative beats as cyberpunk (which I think he would find a lot of enjoyment in) but the focus is more specifically on the merge between technology and biology, so the narrative of cyborgs and "what makes a man/what makes a machine" crises...I think he would have an absolute field day with that.

Lotte Frank: I know Lotte's area of study isn't really ancient anthropology, but I do think she would enjoy something like sandal punk, which takes ancient civilization as its backdrop. As an anthropology major she would definitely love looking at how an ancient civilization would handle the world with advanced technology and contrasting it with the way things operate in her age.

Karl Neumann: I think that he would take the most enjoyment from junk punk. Rather than fitting a certain period of time or culture or location, this subgenre centers around the reuse and recycling of things that were cast out as junk. It's something that I think he would personally deeply relate to, given his time in foster care and being bounced around from family to family for a long time, so it would have a certain significance to his life. I think he'd also like the hopeful message of taking something viewed as garbage and repurposing it.

And that's about as much as I can come up with! Anyway you've given me some AUs to think about

[satyamkumarsingh9]

https://youtu.be/SSu6NKbpcd0

[deframing]

문명의 위기를 낳는 환원론적/원자론적 개인 또는 획일적 전체론으로 전락하지 않기 위해서는 세계를 구성하는 ‘부분들'의 연결을 ‘관계성’이라는 가상의 선으로 재해석할 수 있어야 한다. 사이보그의 ‘부분성’을 다시 읽어야 전체론의 닫힌 세계관을 극복할 수 있다. “내가 사이보그에 천착한 이유는 휴머노이드 형상이 이 균형 감각에 맞서기 때문이다. 사이보그는 스케일을 지키지 않는다. 그것은 단수도 복수도 아니며 하나도 여럿도 아니다. 상호동형적이지 않는 한에서는 비교 불가능한 부분들을 집적하는 연결회로다. 하나의 실체로서 혹은 실체들의 곱으로서, 전체론적으로나 원자론적으로 접근될 수 없다. 사이보그는 흥미로운 복합성(복수성)을 반복한다. I dwelt on the cyborg insofar as that humanoid figure confrontssense of proportion. The cyborg observes no scale: it is neither singular nor plural, neither one nor many, a circuit of connections that joinsparts that cannot be compared insofar as they are not insomorphic with one another. It cannot be approached holistically or atomistically, as an entity or as a multiplication ofentities. It replicates an interesting complexity.” 메릴린 스트래선, <부분적인 연결들> #Book #Culture #Anthropology #Cyborg #Post-Pluralism https://www.instagram.com/p/B50PetfF89g/?igshid=biemf4vzfm2k