°°°°~x§x-<@>
Introduction
The notion that computers will one day “think” like humans has long been a driving force behind artificial intelligence research. However, in the realm of scybernethics, we propose a different, more human-centered approach: shifting our focus from computers that think to computers that make us think. This subtle yet profound change in perspective opens up new avenues for self-understanding, where technology becomes a mirror reflecting our own cognitive processes. This is where the concept of the tekhnicus and its sedimentation becomes central to scybernethic inquiry.
The “Double Cut” and the Technology-by-Itself Fallacy
Our journey begins by acknowledging a critical issue: the illusion that technology is neutral and separate from us. This “technology-by-itself” fallacy, as it’s termed in scybernethics, obscures the fact that technology incorporate human intentions, biases, and ways of thinking. The historical development of computers involved what Bruno Bachimont called a “double cut:” a separation between meaning and matter. This cut, achieved through abstract programming layers, creates an illusion that computers are independently intelligent. But they are not, they are just complex dynamical machines that operate according to the logic of their design, and the logic of their designer.
The Tekhnicus: Mind as a Gesture
To move beyond this illusion, we introduce the concept of the tekhnicus. Inspired by Bourdieu’s notion of “habitus,” the tekhnicus refers to the embodied, practical knowledge and skills we develop through our interactions with technology. It’s about understanding technology not as a tool separate from ourselves but as a kind of extension of our cognitive and physical being. It’s the internal feeling, the “internal gesture” that we develop when interacting with these complex systems. This is also closely related to the idea that “mind is a gesture”, which also speaks to the enactive and sensorimotor understanding of embodied cognition (cf. Piaget, Noë, Di Paolo).
Sedimentation: The Shaping of Our Cognitive Processes
The tekhnicus is not static; it’s a dynamic process shaped through repeated interaction and what we call sedimentation. This means that our habitual use of technology leaves a kind of trace in our ways of thinking, perceiving, and acting. Just as our past experiences sediment in our bodies, our repeated interactions with technologies sediment into our cognitive “habits”. This sedimentation subtly alters our internal dynamics, making certain ways of thinking more natural, more fluent, and often implicit and tacit. This is why it’s important to develop an awareness of the way that we interact with technology, and how technology interacts with us.
Experiential Epistemology: Computers as Mirrors
Instead of viewing computers solely as tools for computation, scybernethics encourages us to consider them as experiential and experimental tools (cf. McCulloch) for self-understanding. By designing and interacting with computer simulations, particularly of a-cognition and complex systems, we can gain a unique “feeling” for the underlying processes. We create computational models not to replicate human intelligence, but to explore and objectify our own cognitive dynamics.
This is where PDP and ANN (Parallel Distributed Processing, Artificial Neural Networks) models become particularly insightful. These models operate in a way that seems to mirrors and mimic our own neural processes but moreover they are more deeply a way of thinking distributed processes, where multiple interconnected units interact to produce emergent behaviors. By working with these models, we develop a practical phenomenological understanding of complex dynamics, which resonates with our lived experience, enabling the tekhnicus to evolve.
The Reflective Cycle: From Process to Form
This understanding is not just theoretical but deeply experiential, involving a “techno-phenomenological” approach (see Don Ihde for e.g. or Stiegler techno-philosophy) that integrates first-person experience with third-person observation. This creates a hermeneutical cycle between the internal feeling (1P) and external representation (3P), between experience and observation, where a reflective loop is made possible through an iterative process. The iterative (vs generative) approach is necessary to tame the self-referential and recursive aspect of the methodology. The design and use of these models become a method of “experimental and experiential epistemology,” where the process of learning is also a process of self-discovery. By using computer simulation as a form of “modeling clay” for our own understanding, we enter an iterative cycle, leading to the stabilization of new cognitive schemes called “techno-experiential schemes” similar to stabilized affordances (Gibson).
The Processual DimenTion
This cycle reveals the importance of the “processual dimenTion,” a term that highlights the dynamic and ever-changing nature of our cognitive processes. In contrast with the static “formal” dimension, the processual dimension emphasizes that our knowledge is always in flux. Our understanding is enacted, meaning it emerges from our interactions with the world, technologies included. The tekhnicus awareness, as a form of practical, embodied knowledge, allows us to navigate this dynamic interplay. This notion is also related to the idea that computers can make us think by “revealing to us what is most mechanically automatic and unconscious in us” (cf. Heidegger).
Conclusion: Toward a Second-Order Rationality
In conclusion, the scybernethic approach proposes a shift from an anthropocentric (anthropo-functionalism) and view of computers as thinking machines to a human-centered view of computers as tools that can make us think by objectifying and reflecting our own cognitive processes. The tekhnicus, shaped by our interactions with technology, embodies this idea. By acknowledging the “technology-by-itself” fallacy and embracing an experiential epistemology, we can leverage technology to foster self-understanding and move towards a second-order rationality (rationality²) —a more reflexive, embodied, and ethical way of thinking. The sedimentation of the tekhnicus is not merely about acquiring skills; it’s about transforming our cognitive processes and actively participating in the ongoing construction of our own selves (self-design).
By paying attention to the way we interact with technology, by understanding how we form a tekhnicus, we start to get a handle on the “mechanical” aspects of our cognition (cognitivist vs enactive epistemology). We can then leverage that understanding to create a more balanced and ethical relationship with our technology, and with ourselves.
°°°°~x§x-<@>
References
- Colombetti, G. (2014). The feeling body: Affective science meets the enactive mind. MIT Press.
- Fuchs, T. (2012). The phenomenology of body memory. In S. C. Koch, T. Fuchs, M. Summa, & C. Müller (Eds.), Body memory, metaphor and movement (pp. 9-22). John Benjamins Publishing Company.
- Havelange, V., Lenay, C., & Stewart, J. (2002). Les représentations : mémoire externe et objets techniques. Intellectica, 35(2), 115-129.