Achieving a Self-Satisfied Intimate Life Through Computer Technologies?



This work aims to understand how a subject can be sentimentally and intimately self-realized by having a relationship with other people through computer technologies. We will analyze the relations binding together the subjects when their “presence” and “interactions” are digitally mediated thanks to a phenomenological analysis. In the first part, we will highlight the differences of using digital devices instead of having face-to-face meetings, especially in virtual worlds. In the second part, we will focus on how other digital devices differently mediate the relation between the subjects, and so we will show how some technologies like teledildo provide elements close to the ones we find in a face-to-face meeting while other technologies like virtual realities do not.


Digital Mediation Virtual realityVirtual Reality Digital technologiesDigital Technologies personPerson intimacyIntimacy 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Adams, T. 2015. Sherry Turkle: ‘I am Not Anti-technology, I am Pro-conversation’. The Guardian, October.
  2. Azuma, R.T. 1997. A Survey of Augmented Reality. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments 6 (4): 355–385.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Ben Ze’ev, A. 2004. Love Online: Emotions on the Internet. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Block, Susan M. 2015. Erotica: Phone Sex. In The International Encyclopedia of Human Sexuality, 325–368. Oxford: Wiley.
  5. Bray, P. 2000. Technology and Embodiment in Ihde and Merleau-Ponty. In Metaphysics, Epistemology, and Technology (Research in Philosophy and Technology), vol. 19, ed. C. Mitcham. Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing.
  6. Brown, J.D., and K.L. L’Engle. 2009. X-Rated: Sexual Attitudes and Behaviors Associated with U.S. Early Adolescents’ Exposure to Sexually Explicit Media. Communication Research 36 (1): 129–151. Scholar
  7. Fletcher, I., B.J.B. Arden, and C.S. Cox. 2003. Automatic Braking System Control. In Proceedings of the 2003 IEEE International Symposium on Intelligent Control ISIC-03, 411–414, IEEE.
  8. Gibson, W. 1984. Neuromancer. New York: HarperCollins.Google Scholar
  9. Gray, F.V. 2016. Men’s Intrusion, Women’s Embodiment: A Critical Analysis of Street Harassment. Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  10. Gupta, M., S.S. Intille, and K. Larson. 2009. Adding GPS-Control to Traditional Thermostats: An Exploration of Potential Energy Savings and Design Challenges. Berlin: Springer. Scholar
  11. Hansmann, U., L. Merk, M.S. Nicklous, and T. Stober. 2001. Pervasive Computing Handbook. Berlin and Heidelberg: Springer. Scholar
  12. Husserl, E. 1980. Phantasie, Bildbewußtsein, Erinnerung, vol. XXIII, ed. Marbach. London: Springer.Google Scholar
  13. Ihde, D. 1990. Technology and the Life World. From Garden to Earth. Bloomington: Indiana University.Google Scholar
  14. Krueger, M.W. 1991. Artificial Reality II. Boston: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
  15. Liberati, N. 2013. Improving the Embodiment Relations by Means of Phenomenological Analysis on the “Reality” of ARs. In 2013 IEEE International Symposium on Mixed and Augmented Reality—Arts, Media, and Humanities (ISMAR-AMH), 13–17.
  16. Liberati, N. 2015. Technology, Phenomenology and the Everyday World: A Phenomenological Analysis on How Technologies Mould Our World. Human Studies, 1–28.
  17. Liberati, N. 2017a. Teledildonics and New Ways of “Being in Touch’’: A Phenomenological Analysis of the Use of Haptic Devices for Intimate Relations. Science and Engineering Ethics 23 (3): 801–823. Scholar
  18. Liberati, N. 2017b. The Emperor’s New Augmented Clothes. Digital Objects as Part of the Every Day. Multimodal Technologies and Interaction 1 (4): 26. Scholar
  19. Lomanowska, A.M., and M.J. Guitton. 2016. Online Intimacy and Well-Being in the Digital Age. Internet Interventions 4: 138–144. Scholar
  20. Lopato, M.S. 2016. Social Media, Love, and Sartre’s Look of the Other: Why Online Communication Is Not Fulfilling. Philosophy & Technology 29 (3): 195–210. Scholar
  21. Lotz, C. 2007. Depiction and Plastic Perception. A Critique of Husserl’s Theory of Picture Consciousness. Continental Philosophy Review 40 (2): 171–185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Lupton, D. 2015. Quantified Sex: A Critical Analysis of Sexual and Reproductive Self-Tracking Using Apps. Culture, Health & Sexuality 17 (4): 440–453. Scholar
  23. Mancini, T., and F. Sibilla. 2017. Offline Personality and Avatar Customisation. Discrepancy Profiles and Avatar Identification in a Sample of MMORPG Players. Computers in Human Behavior 69: 275–283. Scholar
  24. Martinez-Hernandez, U., M. Szollosy, L.W. Boorman, H. Kerdegari, and T.J. Prescott. 2017. Towards a Wearable Interface for Immersive Telepresence in Robotics, 65–73. Cham: Springer.
  25. Milgram, P. 1994. Augmented Reality: A Class of Displays on the Reality-Virtuallity Continuum. SPIE Telemanipulator and Telepresence Technologies 2351: 282–292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Overgaard, S. 2013. Wittgenstein and Other Minds: Rethinking Subjectivity and Intersubjectivity with Wittgenstein, Levinas, and Husserl. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  27. Parker, I. 2014. Young People, Sex and Relationships: The New Norms.
  28. Pitsillides, S., and J. Jefferies. 2016. Intimate Technologies: The Ethics of Simulated Relationships Situating Ethics in Technological Futures. In Proceedings of the 22nd International Symposium on Electronic Art ISEA2016 Hong Kong, 144–151.Google Scholar
  29. Poltash, N.A. 2013. Snapchat and Sexting: A Snapshot of Baring Your Bare Essentials. Richmond Journal of Law & Technology 19 (4): 1–24.
  30. Prager, K.J., and L.J. Roberts. 2004. Deep Intimate Connections: Self and Intimacy in Couple Relationships. In Handbook of Closeness and Intimacy, ed. D. Mashek and A. Aron, 43–60. Mahwah: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
  31. PSFK. 2014. The Future of Wearable Tech.
  32. Rheingold, H. 1990. Teledildonics: Reach Out and Touch Someone. Mondo 2000 (2): 52–54.Google Scholar
  33. Rheingold, H. 1998. Teledildonics and Beyond. In The Postmodern Presence: Readings on Postmodernism in American Culture and Society, 274–287. Lanham: AltaMira Press.Google Scholar
  34. Roesner, F., B.T. Gill, and T. Kohno. 2014. Sex, Lies, or Kittens? Investigating the Use of Snapchat’s Self-Destructing Messages, 64–76. Berlin: Springer.
  35. Rosenberger, R., and P.-P. Verbeek (eds.). 2015. Postphenomenological Investigations: Essays on Human-Technology Relations. Lanham: Lexington Books.Google Scholar
  36. Roussos, G., A.J. Marsh, and S. Maglavera. 2005. Enabling Pervasive Computing with Smart Phones. IEEE Pervasive Computing 4 (2): 20–27.
  37. Sartre, J.-P. 2001. Being and Nothingness: An Essay in Phenomenological Ontology. New York: Citadel Press.Google Scholar
  38. Schneegass, S., and O. Amft (eds.). 2017. Smart Textiles. Fundamentals, Design, and Interaction. Springer.
  39. Sparrow, R. 2017. Robots, Rape, and Representation. International Journal of Social Robotics, 1–13.
  40. Stevenson Won, A., J. Bailenson, J. Lee, and J. Lanier. 2015. Homuncular Flexibility in Virtual Reality. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication. Scholar
  41. Thomas, B.H. 2012. Have We Achieved the Ultimate Wearable Computer? In Wearable Computers (ISWC), 2012 16th International Symposium On, 104–107.
  42. Turkle, S. 2011. Alone Together: Why We Expect More from Technology and Less from Each Other. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  43. Turkle, S. 2015. Reclaiming Conversation: The Power of Talk in a Digital Age. New York: Penguin Press.Google Scholar
  44. Twigg, J. 2009. Clothing, Identity and the Embodiment of Age. In Aging and Identity: A Postmodern Dialogue, ed. J. Powell and T. Gilbert. New York: Nova Science Publishers.Google Scholar
  45. Verbeek, P.-P. 2001. Don Ihde: The Technological Lifeworld. In American Philosophy of Technology: The Empirical Turn, ed. H. Achterhuis, 119–147. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
  46. Verbeek, P.-P. 2005. What Things Do. Philosophical Reflections on Technology, Agency, and Design. University Park: Penn State University Press.Google Scholar
  47. Verbeek, P.-P. 2015. Beyond Interaction: A Short Introduction to Mediation Theory. Interactions XXII (3): 26–31.
  48. Vetere, F., M.R. Gibbs, J. Kjeldskov, S. Howard, F. Mueller “Floyd,” S. Pedell, K. Mecoles, and M. Bunyan. 2005. Mediating Intimacy. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems—CHI ’05, 471. New York: ACM Press.
  49. Weiser, M. 1991. The Computer for the 21st Century. Scientific American 265 (3): 66–75.
  50. Weiser, M. 1993. Hot Topics—Ubiquitous Computing. Computer 26 (10): 71–72. Scholar
  51. Weiser, M. 1996. Open House. Review, the Web Magazine of the Interactive Telecommunications Program of New York University.
  52. Weiser, M., and J.S. Brown. 1996. Designing Calm Technology. POWERGRID Journal 1.
  53. Ye, J., S. Dobson, and P. Nixon. 2008. An Overview of Pervasive Computing Systems. In Ambient Intelligence with Microsystems, 3–17. Boston, MA: Springer.
  54. Zwart, H. 2015. “Extimate” Technologies: Empowerment, Intrusiveness, Surveillance: The Fate of the Human Subject in the Age of Intimate Technologies and Big Data. In International Conference organised by the Committee on Bioethics (DH—BIO) of the Council of Europe, Strasbourg.

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of TwenteEnschedeThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations