On another front:
"...develop nonanthropocentric and nonbinary posthumanities that can survive and thrive despite their loss of the concept of human nature that has historically served as the anchorof the humanities."
Chapter Thirteen is a revised and expanded version of Gladden, Matthew E.,
“The Artificial Life-Form as Entrepreneur: Synthetic Organism-Enterprises and the Re-conceptualization of Business,”
published in Proceedings of the Fourteenth International Conference on the Synthesis and Simulation of Living Systems
From:
The Diffuse Intelligent Other: An Ontology of Nonlocalizable Robots as Moral and Legal Actors
academia.edu
[ed: But....isn't this pretty much what the HFT programs are doing in the markets already?]
"Much thought has been given to the question of who bears moral and legal responsibility for actions performed by robots. Some argue that responsibility could be attributed to a robot if it possessed human-like autonomy and metavolitionality, and that while such capacities can potentially be possessed by a robot with a single spatially compact body, they cannot be possessed by a spatially disjunct, decentralized collective such as a robotic swarm or network. However, advances in ubiquitous robotics and distributed computing open the door to a new form of robotic entity that possesses a unitary intelligence, despite the fact that its cognitive processes are not confined within a single spatially compact, persistent, identifiable body. Such a “nonlocalizable” robot may possess a body whose myriad components interact with one another at a distance and which is continuously transforming as components join and leave the body. Here we develop an ontology for classifying such robots on the basis of their autonomy, volitionality, and localizability. Using this ontology, we explore the extent to which nonlocalizable robots—including those possessing cognitive abilities that match or exceed those of human beings—can be considered moral and legal actors that are responsible for their own actions."
It gets worse...much worse...
From page 69 - Human nature and the posthumanities. ----
"Herbrechter notes that simply because critical posthumanism considers ‘human nature’ to be a cultural artifact, it is not obligated to claim that human nature is unworthy of study.
Indeed, the critical posthumanities will be well-positioned to investigate human nature in a way that expands the scope of such a ‘nature’ in a deanthropocentrizing manner.72
With its insights into the history, structure, and practices of various spheres of culture, cultural posthumanism can play a role in taking the critical methodologies developed within critical posthumanism and applying them across the current range of the humanities to develop nonanthropocentric and nonbinary posthumanities that can survive and thrive despite their loss of the concept of human nature that has historically served as the anchor
of the humanities."73 |
