[ecrea] Call for paper - Being Hu­mans. The Hu­man Con­di­tion in the age of tech­no-hu­ma­ni­sm: re­pre­sen­ta­tions, prac­ti­ces, ex­pe­rien­ces

CALL FOR PA­PERS

The long-run­ning de­ba­te on Po­st-hu­ma­ni­sm is now en­te­ring a new 
pha­se: af­ter the ana­ly­sis of tech­no­lo­gi­cal ima­gi­na­ries and 
'fron­tier ca­se­s' that in­for­med the field du­ring the ‘90s, 
scho­lars’ at­ten­tion is now pro­gres­si­ve­ly fo­cu­sing on mo­re 
com­mon tech­no­lo­gi­cal ar­te­fac­ts, so­cial prac­ti­ces and 
so­cio-tech­no­lo­gi­cal as­sem­bla­ges that seem to re­de­fi­ne the 
boun­da­ries of what was tra­di­tio­nal­ly con­cei­ved as “hu­man”.

Tech­no­lo­gi­cal ar­te­fac­ts that on­ly 20 years ago we­re but 
evo­ca­ti­ve ob­jec­ts that wor­ried scho­lars – or trig­ge­red their 
tech­no-uto­pi­stic ima­gi­na­tion – ha­ve now be­co­me or­di­na­ry 
pre­sen­ces in our li­fe: from ar­ti­fi­cial im­plan­ts to mass 
co­sme­tic sur­ge­ry and bo­dy ma­ni­pu­la­tion, from new forms of 
per­ma­nent me­dia in­ter­con­nec­tion to in­te­rac­tion wi­th 
ar­ti­fi­cial in­tel­li­gen­ces.

As a con­se­quen­ce, the cru­cial theo­re­ti­cal and po­li­ti­cal 
is­sues ad­dres­sed in the 90s by phi­lo­so­phers and so­cial 
scien­tists are now mo­re and mo­re chal­len­ging for ea­ch of us in our 
dai­ly li­fe: the re­la­tion­ship bet­ween cul­tu­re and na­tu­re, the 
mea­ning of being hu­man, the va­lue and mea­ning of ex­pres­sions li­ke 
“hu­man di­gni­ty” and “hu­man rights”, among ma­ny others.

At this sta­ge a num­ber of new que­stions ari­se, cal­ling for 
in­ter­di­sci­pli­na­ry per­spec­ti­ves on so­cial di­scour­ses (wi­th 
their im­pli­cit or ex­pli­cit an­th­ro­po­lo­gi­cal as­sump­tions) as 
well as on so­cial prac­ti­ces.

Is po­st-hu­man a hi­ghly evol­ved le­vel along that li­ne whe­re the 
hu­man is but a lo­wer, hie­rar­chi­cal­ly in­fe­rior sta­ge, to be 
aban­do­ned? Does “po­st” re­fer to a pro­ject of ra­di­cal over­co­ming 
of the hu­man con­di­tion? Or, ra­ther, it opens a way to re-fra­me 
wi­thin the new tech­no­lo­gi­cal con­di­tions the di­scour­se on 
“hu­ma­ni­ty”, wi­thout ex­clu­ding the de­ve­lo­p­ment of a new 
hu­ma­ni­sm, less We­stern and ma­le-cen­te­red, not on­ly com­mit­ted 
to de­fen­ding the pa­st but wil­ling to dia­lo­gue wi­th the pre­sent?

Is the al­ter­na­ti­ve bet­ween de­fen­se of things as they are and 
com­ple­te di­smis­sal the on­ly con­cei­va­ble one? How is it 
pos­si­ble to re­think the mea­ning of “being hu­man” (ra­ther than 
ani­mals or me­re­ly ma­chi­nes) to­day, wi­thout fal­ling in the trap 
of su­ch an al­ter­na­ti­ve? Is the mer­ging of hu­man and tech­no­lo­gy 
pu­shing to­ward the dis­so­lu­tion of any idea of hu­man na­tu­re or is 
it ra­ther cal­ling for a ne­ces­sa­ry re­de­fi­ni­tion? Re­mo­ving any 
li­mit of what can be cal­led “hu­man”: is this a real step to­ward 
free­dom or ra­ther a way to in­fi­ni­te ma­ni­pu­la­tion?

Mo­reo­ver: Can our bo­dy be­co­me an im­pe­di­ment to en­han­ce­ment? 
Is to­tal di­sem­bo­di­ment the pa­th to free­dom we are loo­king for? 
Wa­sn’t it the sa­me prin­ci­ple that dro­ve world fi­nan­cia­li­za­tion 
of eco­no­my, a pro­cess who­se ef­fec­ts we could re­co­gni­ze as 
de­hu­ma­ni­zing, yet una­ble to cri­ti­ci­ze at its roo­ts?

May­be a new dua­li­sm is ri­sing, ac­cor­ding to whi­ch our bo­dy is 
ac­tual­ly an im­pe­di­ment not to “spi­rit”, as it was in the pa­st, 
but to po­ten­cy and its un­li­mi­ted ex­pan­sion: a bra­ke on rea­li­ty 
aug­men­ted by tech­ni­que and on eco­no­my in­crea­sed by fi­nan­ce.

No­wa­days, when tech­no­lo­gy is no lon­ger a tool, or even ju­st an 
en­vi­ron­ment, but is wea­ra­ble and in­cor­po­ra­ted, and can act 
re­troac­ti­ve­ly on the ve­ry struc­tu­re of the or­ga­ni­sm, what are 
the main nar­ra­ti­ves for ma­king sen­se of the new hu­man con­di­tion?

How the two main li­nes of hea­ling (di­mi­ni­shing suf­fe­ring, 
pre­ven­ting di­sea­se, com­pen­sa­ting im­pair­men­ts) and en­han­cing 
(over­co­ming any kind of li­mi­ts, in­de­fi­ni­te­ly in­crea­sing 
po­wer and even­tual­ly crea­te li­fe and at­tain im­mor­ta­li­ty) 
re­la­te and in­ter­sect in con­tem­po­ra­ry pu­blic di­scour­se?

May a li­mit to en­han­ce­ment be le­gi­ti­ma­te or even de­si­ra­ble? 
And how to de­fi­ne it? Ac­cor­ding to whi­ch cri­te­ria? Are we mo­ving 
to­ward a li­mi­tless so­cie­ty, and wi­th whi­ch con­se­quen­ces?

Is “en­han­cing” a step in se­cu­la­ri­za­tion in whi­ch the 
want-to-be-god Pro­me­thean at­ti­tu­de rea­ches its hi­ghe­st point, at 
the sa­me ti­me re­vea­ling that it ne­ver real­ly eman­ci­pa­ted from 
the idea of ??an om­ni­po­tent God?

To what ex­tent en­han­cing th­rou­gh tech­ni­que feeds a 
con­su­me­ri­st in­di­vi­dua­li­sm that is per­fec­tly func­tio­nal to 
tech­no­ca­pi­ta­li­sm, whi­le pre­ten­ding to in­crea­se the free­dom 
of choi­ce? Are we be­co­ming less de­pen­dent on hu­man beings and 
mo­re on tech­ni­cal sy­stems?

Is en­han­cing th­rou­gh tech­ni­que the in­di­vi­dua­li­stic 
al­ter­na­ti­ve to en­han­cing th­rou­gh sha­ring and so­cial bonds?

All the­se and ma­ny other que­stions may be ad­dres­sed, in 
con­si­de­ring the dif­fe­rent nar­ra­ti­ves, in tra­di­tio­nal and 
di­gi­tal me­dia, that to­day con­tri­bu­te to build a new 
an­th­ro­po-tech­ni­cal ima­gi­na­ry in the pu­blic sphe­re, to dri­ve 
the do­me­sti­ca­tion of en­han­cing tech­no­lo­gies and to sha­pe the 
so­cial prac­ti­ces re­la­ted to aug­men­ted ex­pe­rien­ce.

Pos­si­ble to­pics in­clu­de, but are not li­mi­ted to:

    * Re­pre­sen­ta­tions of aug­men­ted bo­dies in ci­ne­ma, TV 
se­ries, co­mics, espe­cial­ly com­pa­red to the ones of the ‘90s
    * Uto­pias and di­sto­pias in po­st-hu­man so­cie­ty: the 
ima­gi­ned world of ra­di­cal tech­no­lo­gi­cal aug­men­ta­tion
    * The ro­le of pa­ra­tex­ts, pro­mo­tio­nal ma­te­rial, 
ad­ver­ti­sing in re­pre­sen­ting the idea of hu­man en­han­ce­ment and 
in the con­struc­tion of a new com­mon­sen­se
    * The po­pu­la­ri­za­tion of the de­ba­te on re­gu­la­to­ry 
fra­mework, li­mi­ts, que­stions of equi­ty and ju­sti­ce in a so­cie­ty 
aug­men­ted by tech­nics and in an eco­no­my aug­men­ted by fi­nan­ce
    * Nar­ra­ti­ves of po­st-hu­man in­sti­tu­tions and so­cial bonds 
in fic­tio­nal and non fic­tio­nal me­dia di­scour­ses
    * Hu­man, ma­chi­ne, ani­mal: the re­de­fi­ni­tion of their 
boun­da­ries and re­la­tion­ships in so­cial di­scour­ses
    * Ro­bo­tics, ar­ti­fi­cial in­tel­li­gen­ce, bo­dy 
ma­ni­pu­la­tion, ar­ti­fi­cial im­plan­ts: eth­no­gra­phy of 
dai­ly-li­fe prac­ti­ces and ex­pe­rien­ces


Dead­li­nes & Gui­de­li­nes

Plea­se send your ab­stract to: (redazione.cs /at/ unicatt.it) by April 15, 2015.

No­ti­fi­ca­tions of ac­cep­tan­ce will be emai­led shor­tly af­ter the 
dead­li­ne. Ab­strac­ts mu­st be from 300 to 400 words long, and may be 
pre­sen­ted in En­glish. The pro­po­sal shall in­clu­de 5 key­words, 
au­thors, in­sti­tu­tion, and con­tac­ts (e-mail), to­ge­ther wi­th a 
short cur­ri­cu­lum for ea­ch au­thor.

Au­thors will be asked to send the who­le ar­ti­cle (writ­ten 
pre­fe­ra­bly in En­glish, but Spa­nish, Fren­ch and Ita­lian are al­so 
wel­co­me) by Ju­ne 30, 2015.

Con­tri­bu­tions will be sent to two in­de­pen­dent re­viewers in a 
dou­ble-blind pro­ce­du­re prior to pu­bli­ca­tion de­ci­sion. 
Ar­ti­cles should be bet­ween 4,000-5,000 words (no mo­re than 35,000 
cha­rac­ters, spa­ces and no­tes in­clu­ded), but shor­ter ar­ti­cles 
will al­so be con­si­de­red.

Sub­mit­ted pa­pers should not ha­ve been pre­viou­sly pu­bli­shed nor 
cur­ren­tly un­der con­si­de­ra­tion for pu­bli­ca­tion el­sewhe­re.

A gui­de for au­thors, sam­ple is­sues, and other re­le­vant 
in­for­ma­tion is avai­la­ble on the jour­na­l’s web­si­te: 
http://comunicazionisociali.vitaepensiero.com/.

For fur­ther in­for­ma­tion or que­ries re­gar­ding this Spe­cial 
Is­sue, plea­se con­tact the edi­tor: (chiara.giaccardi /at/ unicatt.it)
*****************************************************
Full Professor of Media Sociology and Anthropology

Department of Communication, Catholic University of the Sacred Heart – Milan

Editor-in-Chief Comunicazioni Sociali - Journal of Media, Performing 
Arts and Cultural Studies

ARC (Centre for the Anthropology of Religion and Cultural Change)

www.generativita.it

(chiara.giaccardi /at/ unicatt.it)

@GiaccardiChiara


*****************************************************
Full Professor of Media Sociology and Anthropology

Department of Communication, Catholic University of the Sacred Heart – Milan

Editor-in-Chief Comunicazioni Sociali - Journal of Media, Performing 
Arts and Cultural Studies

ARC (Centre for the Anthropology of Religion and Cultural Change)

www.generativita.it

(chiara.giaccardi /at/ unicatt.it)

@GiaccardiChiara


*****************************************************
Full Professor of Media Sociology and Anthropology

Department of Communication, Catholic University of the Sacred Heart – Milan

Editor-in-Chief Comunicazioni Sociali - Journal of Media, Performing 
Arts and Cultural Studies

ARC (Centre for the Anthropology of Religion and Cultural Change)

www.generativita.it

(chiara.giaccardi /at/ unicatt.it)

@GiaccardiChiara


---------------
ECREA-Mailing list
---------------
This mailing list is a free service offered by Nico Carpentier and ECREA.
--
To subscribe, post or unsubscribe, please visit
http://commlist.org/
--
To contact the mailing list manager:
Email: (nico.carpentier /at/ vub.ac.be)
URL: http://homepages.vub.ac.be/~ncarpent/
--
ECREA - European Communication Research and Education Association
Chauss�de Waterloo 1151, 1180 Uccle, Belgium
Email: (info /at/ ecrea.eu)
URL: http://www.ecrea.eu
---------------