Don Ihde’s alterity relation focuses on the quasi-otherness of dynamic technologies that interact with humans. The alterity relation is one means to study relations between humans and artificial intelligence (AI) systems. However, research on alterity relations has not defined the difference between playing with a toy, using a computer, and interacting with a social robot or chatbot. We suggest that Ihde’s quasi-other concept fails to account for the interactivity, autonomy, and adaptability of social robots and chatbots, which more closely approach (...) human alterity. In this article, we will examine experiences with a chatbot, Replika, and a humanoid robot, a RealDoll, to show how some users experience AI systems as companions. First, we show that the perception of social robots and chatbots as intimate companions is grounded in communication. Advances in natural language processing (NLP) and natural language generation (NLG) allow a relationship to form between some users and social robots and chatbots. In this relationship, some users experience social robots and chatbots as more than quasi-others. We will use Kanemitsu’s another-other concept to analyze cases where social robots and chatbots should be distinguished from quasi-others. (shrink)

The goal of this paper is to encourage participants in the debate about the locus of cognition (e.g., extended mind vs embedded mind) to turn their attention to noteworthy anthropological and sociological considerations typically (but not uniquely) arising from transhumanist and posthumanist research. Such considerations, we claim, promise to potentially give us a way out of the stalemate in which such a debate has fallen. A secondary goal of this paper is to impress trans and post-humanistically inclined readers to embrace (...) (or at least seriously reflect on) the extended mind thesis as a potential gamechanger to the state of play in their own debates. We start off (Sect. 1) by reviewing two crucial ideas (homo faber and plasticity of the body schema) that are instrumental in setting up the dispute between extended and embedded. We then summarise (Sect. 2), the stalemate between these two competing accounts of cognition, and review some of the dialectics underlying it. In Sect. 3, to get out of the stalemate, we propose to focus on a series of important anthropological and sociological considerations derived from and related to trans and posthumanist research. In doing so, we claim (Sect. 4) that an extended approach to cognition becomes anthropologically preferable and morally as well as socially more desirable than an embedded one. (shrink)

What is the relation between material hermeneutics, bodies, perception and materials? In this article, I shall argue cultural learning processes tie them together. Three aspects of learning can be identified in cultural learning processes. First, all learning is tied to cultural practices. Second, all learning in cultural practice entangle humans’ ability to recognize a material world conceptually, and finally the boundaries of objects, the object we perceive, are set by shifting material-conceptual entanglements. All these aspects are important for material hermeneutics (...) in a technoculture. Postphenomenology has expanded the connection between hermeneutics and phenomenology by focusing on studies of how perception, bodies, materials, the sensual realm and hermeneutics are entwined when we perceive the world through technologies. Following Don Ihde, hermeneutics expands beyond interpretation of texts in the humanities. We can interpret materials as for instance animal bones to make new sense of the Bible. New technologies have expanded material hermeneutics, when we can ‘look’ into bodies and ‘perceive’ below surfaces. Interpretation via such tools in a technoculture, both limit and extend our hermeneutic horizons in the humanities as well as in the natural sciences. Furthermore, from the perspective of cultural learning processes, material hermeneutics in the human and natural sciences depend on more than mediating instruments. Material hermeneutics also involve the material cultural environments of scientific apparatuses and the scientists’ processes of learning in cultural practice. This changes the focus from relations in postphenomenology to processes of relations. (shrink)

Philosophical and technoculture studies surrounding the existential understanding of the human–technology–world experience have seen a slow but steady increase that makes a turn to material hermeneutics in the second decade of the twenty-first century (Ihde in Postphenomenology: essays in the postmodern context. Northwestern University Press, Evanston, 1993; Capurro in AI Soc 25(1):35–42, 2010; Romele in Digital hermeneutics: philosophical investigations in new media and technologies. Routledge, Abingdon, 2020; among others). This renewed focus makes sense because human–technology–world experiences need to be interpreted. (...) And many of these are more complicated to study, precisely because technology is at the root of the experiences. One interesting subset of technologies is media technologies, also called digital media, which intertwines the device and the content to mediate together in the world (Irwin in Digital media: human-technology connection. Lexington Books, Lanham, 2016). Visual media technologies and media content, together, through what is called moving image technologies, create virtual role-playing, virtual and augmented reality, video games, and social media focused worlds that have become central experiences in contemporary culture. Just as image-based scientific instruments read the world in different ways, so to do these visual mediated experiences. How might this comingled “reading” of technology explain the digital film language and experience? I contend that understanding the existential “early” film experience helps understand the new age of cinema, with implications for digital media, digital representation of the visual, and technoscience and technoculture studies. The material hermeneutics perspective called postphenomenology is one way to study these visually focused human–technology–world perceptual and interpretive experiences. Don Ihde’s methodological framework (1990, 1993, 1996, 2002, 2010, 2012, 2016, 2019) is both an idea from technoscience studies and a set of nuanced vocabulary that helps to explore and reveal variations, patterns, and trajectories of the whole-body experience of technology. This use case will first explore traditional cinema and then the “new age” term “moving image”, to learn more about this complicated and radically transforming technological experience. Work by Don Ihde and Vivian Sobchack is considered. (shrink)

The purpose is to find out the specifics of the ancient paradigm of technology. Task: to determine the ancient worldview universals that define ancient picture of the world; find out the meaning of the ancient concept of «techne». Methodology. To perform the tasks it was used the paradigm approach to the historical transformation technology, and was made historical reconstruction and explication of the production and development of technology in antiquity. Using a functional approach has revealed a close, the inextricable link (...) between the constitution and functioning of ancient technology and ancient philosophical universals. The elements of scientific novelty is, first, the paradigm approach to historical transformation technology, and secondly, research technology within the ideological world view that is due to the domination of ancient philosophical wagon filled with new content, different from the archaic paradigm of technology and paradigms machinery Ancient East. Conclusions.Proved that historical transformation technology primarily due to dramatic changes philosophical Universal, which in turn lead to a new world and a new content and technology space in it. Proved that the development of technology and its inclusion in an ideological view of the world contributed to several factors: first, the ancient world view is no longer a purely mythological, woven natural-philosophical ideas about the universe; basis of ancient philosophy cosmocentrism with signs of logocentrism. Second, the ability to think through concepts, form them, allowing isolate rational considerations of practical everyday experience was the great achievement of ancient philosophy, the first attempt at scientific understanding of the world, the precondition and foundation of science as such. Thirdly, purely mechanical, technical model of the world that started the ancient Greek philosophers, initiated the transition to a scientific rational explanation of nature, unlike the previous one - irrational and mystical. Fourth, despite the fact that ancient man was still dependent on the nature of space needed, he was sufficiently autonomous from traditional models of life and behaviour in the implementation of his career. Fifthly, the principle of creative development, production of the new, which was characteristic of the macrocosm, nature, spread his microcosm - man. (shrink)