Well, it transpires that the abstract I submitted to the TAG 2006 conference has been accepted, so I'll be in the plenary session on 15th December. The abstract is as follows:
Ex Machina: Archaeology In A Post-Human Future
Recent research in disciplines as varied as medicine, robotics, and artificial intelligence has raised the prospect that, during the 21 st Century, humans will be increasingly able to alter themselves physically, through both biological and mechanical means. The consequences of such alterations to humans may have serious implications for the study of humanity. Indeed, they have led to some researchers speculating that we may see the emergence of “post-humanity”, a development which has caused Francis Fukuyama to revise his previous assertion that human history essentially ended in 1989 (Fukuyama, 2002). The purpose of this paper, therefore, is twofold: to introduce some of the means by which humanity may become post-human, and to speculate as to how archaeology as a discipline might respond to the challenge of interpreting a human past from a post-human viewpoint.
I have to admit, when I first found out I'd made it in, I was terrified: the plenary session will be attended by just about everyone who's attending, which will include some very big names indeed. Then there's the fact that I'm not an expert in either posthuman or archaeological theory.
I've calmed down a bit now though. Thinking about it, they accepted the paper because they felt it was an interesting subject, and my main purpose is really just to raise the issue. Plus, being a plenary session, there's no Q&A, so no-one will be able to ask me a question I don't understand until I'm off-stage.
Full details on the TAg conference can be found here.
3 comments:
congratulations! sounds like fantastic fun.
Good to hear direct from you what your paper's about, Ste, especially after I spoke to Dad and he told me, "It's about science fiction creatures in archaeology. Or something."
I read an interesting theory in the Times. The columnist was referring to a study that has "proven" that babies with big heads are more intelligent. She mentioned that human babies historically have only been able to grow to a certain size in the womb, because otherwise they can't get out of the mother. With the advent of the Caesarean section, however, modern babies could grow larger in the womb. If this is right, then we have a good example of technology influencing the course of human biological evolution (though evolution tests a wide variety of possibilities - this would be forcing evolution to choose). Anyway...
Post a Comment