It is strange to me that I agree with the concept that evolution can be applied to multiple disciplines, yet I find Dennett's theory of memes far too simplified. He draws support for his idea from biologists, linguists, historians, and philosophers among others, creating an argument drawn from both the humanities and the sciences... but the idea of memes seems to reduce everything to a very boring formula. I feel that if what Dennett says is true, then we could reduce all human thought to mathematical equations. Life just isn't that simple.

CONCEIVING ADA GROUP 4 DISCUSSION

1.   What was your response to the film?

Exchange of Knowledge for sex

It wasn’t a fantasy watching Ada and being pregnant

Ada was humanizing machines

Software having knowledge of real life in terms of Emmy having 1st cyber born human

2. What questions does the film raise for you?

How possible is this?

While watching movie it seemed like it was filmed in current day – during the era in which it was filmed

Analogy of death- and Ada being timeless through virtuality

Emmy’s daughter embodied Ada, or did she rebirth Ada?

Click on the attachment to see a pie chart of our responses to the question:

My classmate's mind is.....

It was a challenge to make meaning out of this information! 

Give it a try if you'd like.

Please "add a new comment" to this posting, and tell us who you will "be" (or @ least perform!)
in the panels we are hosting next Monday and Wednesday.

You should come to class prepared to say
* what role gender played in "your" life
* what role science and/or technology played
* how they intersected
* in what ways they “reciprocally shaped one another."

In "your" day, what language did you use
* to talk about “gender” and “technology”?
* did "you" use these words, or other ones?
* for example: how did "you" understand the
difference between “natural” and “artificial”?

 This is an amazing video that seems tailor made for this class

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-4CV05HyAbM

 We talked last week about the IBM supercomputer Watson and how despite its being programmed by human programmers, managed to surpass the intelligence of its own creators to win Jeopardy! against two reigning human champions. Thinking how this creation has managed to surpass the capacity of its creators, I got to thinking about humankind's relationship with its own "creator." It makes me cringe to even type out a sentence about humankind having a creator, and this is exactly what fascinates me: have we, like Watson, evolved past the level of needing a creator?

Class Notes 2/21
Coursekeeping:

For Wednesday: Watch the 85 minute movie "Conceiving Ada" which is on reserve at Canaday library. Think about the movie in response to Hayles' call for new media and think about how you would handle this material in a 'digital humanities' mode.

For next week: Come to class prepared to 'speak as' an individual whose life or work circumstances shaped, or were impacted by, an interesting interaction of gender, information, science and/or technology. Chose your person by Friday and include this in your post. The reading for next week is in preparation for this.

Section 1:

The This American Life podcast this week had an interesting "act" about a couple who raised a chimp (Lucy) as a human until Lucy was too big and strong to live with them and moved to an island off the coast of Gambia where a woman acted like a chimp in order to teach Lucy to be a chimp. The story raised a lot of the questions we have been discussing about human/ animal relationships as well as meaning. Was the relationship between Lucy and her "parents" and then Lucy and Janis, the woman who taught her to be a chimp, a meaningful one?

You can listen to the episode for free here:

http://www.thisamericanlife.org/