Advertisement

AI & SOCIETY

, Volume 32, Issue 3, pp 465–473 | Cite as

Converging technologies and a modern man: emergence of a new type of thinking

  • Anna GorbachevaEmail author
  • Sergei Smirnov
Open Forum
  • 312 Downloads

Abstract

The processes of changing the way of thinking, typical for modern people, and subsequently shaping a new “Homo clicking” individual are analyzed. The authors consider a specific mindset of “Homo clicking” illustrating it with some patterns and modes of action that characterize individuals in the human–machine interface. Under this frame, the influence of modern converging technologies upon human conduct is examined and functional redistribution between human beings and technical devices is outlined. In the literature, the latter phenomenon is referred to as “life outsourcing.” This material is used to introduce several principles that form the basis for a new type of thought and actions of “Home clicking”: snapping, transforming trust into knowledge, and action reduction. Reducing the traditional classic understanding of a human act of thinking to a pattern of a thinking act as a need-satisfying act is described. In the last section, we introduce an extension of Searle’s Chinese room, which can be seen as a possible consequence of intensive exploitation of technologies.

Keywords

Converging technologies Life outsourcing Trust Knowledge The reduction principle Need “Homo clicking” “Chinese room” 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This work has been supported by Russian Science Foundation (“Building up neoclassical anthropology. A new human ontology” No. 14-18-03087 Project). The Project is carried out at Novosibirsk State University of Economics and Management.

References

  1. Baudrillard J (1981) Simulacres et Simulation. Éditions Galilée. Galilée, ParisGoogle Scholar
  2. Borgmann A (2012) So who am I really? Personal identity in the age of the internet. AI Soc 28:15–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bostrom N (2014) Superintelligence: paths, dangers, strategies. Oxford University Press, Oxford, p 352Google Scholar
  4. Eco U (2011) Art and beauty in the middle ages. 2002. Yale University Press, New HavenGoogle Scholar
  5. Florensky P (1992) At the watershed of thought, vol 28. Simbol, Paris, pp 125–216 (in Russian) Google Scholar
  6. Heidegger M (1954) Die frage nach der technik. Die Künste im technischen Zeitalter, München, pp 70–108Google Scholar
  7. Hongladarom S (2013) Ubiquitous computing, empathy and the self. AI Soc 28:227–236CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Jung C (1958) Gut und Böse in der analitischen Psychologie. Gesammelte Werke. Walter-Verlag, Olten, Bd 10Google Scholar
  9. Kapp E (1877) Grundlinien einer Philosophie der Technik. Zur Entstehungsgeschichte der Cultur aus neuen Gesichtspunkten, Braunschweig, p 42Google Scholar
  10. Kile F (2013) Artificial intelligence and society: a furtive transformation. AI Soc 28:107–115CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Lanir J (2010) You are not a gadget. Alfred A. Knopf, N.Y., p 209Google Scholar
  12. Laszlo E (2001) Macroshift: navigating the transformation to a sustainable. World Berrett-Koehler, San FranciscoGoogle Scholar
  13. Lorenz K (1973) Die acht Todsünden der zivilisierten Menschheit. MünchenGoogle Scholar
  14. Manzotti R, Pepperell R (2013) The new mind: thinking beyond the head. AI Soc 28:157–166CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. McLuhan M (1962) The Gutenberg galaxy: the making of typographic man. University of Toronto Press, TorontoGoogle Scholar
  16. Nyiri K (2006) The mobile telephone as a return to unalienated communication. Knowl Technol Policy 19:54–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Peirce Ch (1956) Chance, love and logic. N.Y.Google Scholar
  18. Roco M, Bainbridge W (eds) (2002) Converging technologies for improving human performance. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  19. Roger FM (2001) Metal and flesh. MIT press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  20. Searle J (1980) Minds, brains, and programs. Behav Brain Sci 3:417–457CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Shields P (2005) Some problems with communities of choice. J Value Inq 39:215–228CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Turilli M, Vaccaro A, Taddeo M (2010) The case of online trust. Knowl Technol Policy 23:333–345CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Novosibirsk State University of Economics and ManagementNovosibirskRussia

Personalised recommendations