Cyborg intentionality: Rethinking the phenomenology of human–technology relations


This article investigates the types of intentionality involved in human–technology relations. It aims to augment Don Ihde’s analysis of the relations between human beings and technological artifacts, by analyzing a number of concrete examples at the limits of Ihde’s analysis. The article distinguishes and analyzes three types of “cyborg intentionality,” which all involve specific blends of the human and the technological. Technologically mediated intentionality occurs when human intentionality takes place “through” technological artifacts; hybrid intentionality occurs when the technological actually merges with the human; and composite intentionality is the addition of human intentionality and the intentionality of technological artifacts.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Fig. 1


  1. 1.

    Some works of the artists discussed can be viewed at


  1. Bostrom, N. (2004). The future of human evolution. In Ch. Tandy (Ed.), Death and anti-death: two hundred years after Kant, fifty years after Turing (pp. 339–371). Palo Alto, CA: Ria University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  2. De Mul, J. (2002). Cyberspace Odyssee. Kampen: Klement.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Haraway, D. (1991). A cyborg manifesto: science, technology, and socialist-feminism in the late twentieth century. In D. Haraway (Ed.), Simians, cyborgs and women: the reinvention of nature (pp. 149–181). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Hayles, K. (1999). How we became posthuman. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Heidegger, M. (1977). The age of the world picture. In M. Heidegger (Ed.), The question concerning technology and other essays. New York: Harper & Row (translated by W. Lovitt).

    Google Scholar 

  6. Ihde, D. (1979). Technics and Praxis. Dordrecht: Reidel.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Ihde, D. (1983). Existential technics. Albany: State University of New York Press.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Ihde, D. (1990). Technology and the lifeworld. Bloomington/Minneapolis: Indiana University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Irrgang, B. (2005). Posthumanes Menschsein. Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Latour, B. (1993). We have never been modern. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press (translated by C. Porter).

    Google Scholar 

  11. Nietzsche, F. (1969/1883). Thus spoke Zarathustra: a book for everyone and no one. London: Penguin Books.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Sloterdijk, P. (1999). Regeln für den Menschenpark: Ein Antwortschreiben zu Heideggers Brief über den Humanismus. Frankfurt/M: Suhrkamp.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Stiegler, B. (1998). Technics and time 1: The fault of Epimetheus. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Verbeek, P. P. (2005). What things do: Philosophical reflections on technology, agency, and design. University Park, PA: Penn State University Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references


This article was written with financial support of NWO, the Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research.

Author information



Corresponding author

Correspondence to Peter-Paul Verbeek.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Verbeek, P. Cyborg intentionality: Rethinking the phenomenology of human–technology relations. Phenom Cogn Sci 7, 387–395 (2008).

Download citation


  • Intentionality
  • Human–technology relations
  • Cyborg
  • Posthumanism
  • Don Ihde