Guidance for readings, 080924: Hayles, Latour
Hayles: What are similarities and differences between human communication and Shannon’s model? What is the McCulloch-Pitts neuron, and how does it model human thought processes? What use does Hayles make of the concept of homeostasis, and what is its connection to how we think about human behaviour? What does Hayles mean by “reflexivity”, and what role does it play in modeling human minds as information-processing machines? What relationships exist between, on the one hand, the concept of the precise specification of what a machine can do, and on the other hand, concepts of neurosis, ambiguity, and metaphor?
Latour: Here we enter new territory. So far in this course we have been dealing with machinist tropes for understanding human thought. Now the scale has changed: we are in the midst of a whole new set of issues: the belief in reality, the status of science studies, the dangers of bifurcations between the mind in here and the world out there, or between Nature and Society. What has this realm to do with what we’ve been reading so far? Has Latour been introduced here just to acquaint us with a major thinker of this course? But here’s a suggestion: follow the connections, first, between Latour’s concept of the “mind in a vat” and the concepts of mind we’ve already met, and second, between his concept of the “mind in a vat” and the new issues he would have us face. If there are strong connections between both pairs of connections, then Latour’s attack on those bifurcations mentioned above (we’ll be getting more familiar with those as the course proceeds) is also an attack against those machinist tropes we’ve encountered. As you read this first chapter of Pandora’s Hope, try to follow this suggestion about how to read it. And as you read, try to bring into focus where Latour is going. Of course, you’ll find out if you’re right only when you finish the book, but this is a good time to make some effort to discern the road ahead.