Our posthuman futures and education: Homo Zappiens, Cyborgs, and the New Adam

Dahlin, Bo

doi:10.1016/j.futures.2011.08.007

Cited by 18 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 23 publications

(25 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Things like filter bubbles, deep-fakes, psychopolitics, and computational propaganda (Brundage et al, 2018;Dahlin, 2012;Pariser, 2012) could work as early examples of such parasite at work. The dualistic nature, or the binary game, between these two poles, harmful and beneficial, show how the divide, so evident in digital technologies, play a significant role in the metaphorical level of the AI as the new electricity.…”

Section: Deconstructing and Reconstructing Aimentioning

confidence: 99%

The itching back of a cyborg: Grasping AI systems

Dufva¹,

Dufva²

2020

RAE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Mikko Dufva is Sitra's leading foresight specialist. In his work, he examines future trends, the tensions between these trends and mental images connected with the future. In addition, he seeks to identify signals that may be weak now but are nevertheless significant from the point of view of the future. He has extensive experience in foresight and futures studies and a doctorate in Science (Technology) on creation of futures knowledge and systemic foresight.Tomi Slotte Dufva (Doctor of Art) works as a university lecturer at Aalto University, specialising in emerging practices within art education. Slotte Dufva artistic work focuses primarily on the intersections between art, technology and science. He is the co-founder of art & craft school Robotti, which combines technology and art. Slotte Dufva's research revolves around the topics of post-digital art, embodied digitality, art and tech, and societal, philosophical and cultural issues within AI and digitality.

show abstract

Section: Deconstructing and Reconstructing Aimentioning

confidence: 99%

The itching back of a cyborg: Grasping AI systems

Dufva¹,

Dufva²

2020

RAE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…CSS demands consideration of who is most affected by economic models premised on unsustainable 'sustainability' models that accelerate resource exploitation and wealth accumulation. It also interrogates the salvation narratives advanced in corporate, governmental, and STEM policy sectors-from romantically 'solving' worldwide humanitarian and ecological crises to having the last word on debates surrounding 'progress', from geoengineering and genetic modification to artificial intelligence, transhumanism (Dahlin, 2012) and the very meaning(s) of sustainability itself.…”

Section: Critical Sustainability Studies: An Alternative Model Beyond Stem Educationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Pathways to sustainable futures: A “production pedagogy” model for STEM education

Alonso-Yanez

Thumlert

Castell

et al. 2019

Futures

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

STEM education initiatives currently pervade the global landscape of educational reform. Unfortunately, the rush to adopt STEM reforms in North American schools and develop students for competitive 21 st century knowledge economies has encouraged an uncritical embrace of underlying STEM narratives and purposes, thus foreclosing critical discussion, alternative models, and new perspectives on doing science education differently. Here, we unpack narratives and practices informing STEM education that induct learning actors into 'anticipatory regimes' that advance neoliberal ends and technocapitalist ideologies. We argue first that STEM narratives of progress, competition, and innovation increasingly obscure the urgent ecological, ethical and social justice conditions students confront daily. Ironically, this prepares them for a future rendered unsustainable by scientific and technological orthodoxy. We then draw upon critical sustainability studies (CSS) to articulate new axiological orientations that reposition science and technology learning. Lastly, we describe and illustrate an approach aligned with these critical principlesproduction pedagogywhose theories and practices re-vision science and technology education. These strategies will situate students in agentive roles now, in this present, using realworld tools in authentic sociotechnical contexts. They can then confront their own capacities and limitations to engage in personally relevant ways, as producers, with techno-scientific knowledge. IntroductionPolicy and initiatives advancing STEM education are pervasive within the global landscape of educational reform. While STEM policy documents provide rationale for ratifying new curricula that can deepen students' engagement in the sciences, mathematics, engineering, and technology fields, STEM education discourses largely fail to translate innovations in policy into innovations in pedagogy, and neglect, as well, theoretical and epistemological advances in conceptualizing the impacts of science and technology in physical, social, and symbolic worlds (Murphy, Firetto, & Greene, 2017; Rudolph, 2008;Zeidler, 2016). At the same time, the urgency to adopt and implement STEM reforms in North American schools has resulted in an uncritical embrace of underlying STEM aims and purposes, in turn foreclosing dissent, critical discussion, alternative models, and new perspectives on how we might 'do' science, and (STEM) education, differently.

show abstract

“…Commentators differ, however, on the location of educators on this slippery slope, how steep the slope is and where the slope will end. Dahlin offers a three‐part grid, which it might be helpful to consider (Dahlin, ). First there is the current incorporation of Information and Communications Technology (ICT) in the classroom.…”

Section: Educational Queriesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Transhuman Education? Sloterdijk's Reading of Heidegger'sLetter on Humanism

Long

2016

Journal of Philosophy of Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Peter Sloterdijk presented a reading of Heidegger's Letter on Humanism at a conference held at Elmau in 1999. Reinterpreting the meaning of humanism in the light of Heidegger's Letter, Sloterdijk focused his presentation on the need to redefine education as a form of genetic ‘taming’ and proposed what seemed to be support for positive eugenics. Although Sloterdijk claimed that he only wanted to open a debate on the issue, he could not have been surprised at the level of opposition this suggestion aroused. In the weeks following, he blamed Habermas for raising this opposition and for refusing to engage with him openly. Although Luis Arenas has chronicled the aftermath of Sloterdijk's paper, it may be of interest to educators to examine how Heidegger's text is presented. What is this new humanism? If Heidegger's new humanism was based on a mystical attitude towards Being, so Sloterdijk's new humanism was to be based on the materialist principles of a biotechnological age. Unlike Heidegger who rejected technology as yet one further example of the forgetfulness of Being, Sloterdijk seems to embrace technology and the enhancement of the human body and mind as the next great step forward in educational theory. Could he possibly be right? Is education in these times a partner or an opponent of the technological enhancement of the human being? This article tries to identify Sloterdijk's disagreements with Heidegger on the question of the human.

show abstract

Our posthuman futures and education: Homo Zappiens, Cyborgs, and the New Adam

Cited by 18 publications

References 23 publications

The itching back of a cyborg: Grasping AI systems

The itching back of a cyborg: Grasping AI systems

Pathways to sustainable futures: A “production pedagogy” model for STEM education

Transhuman Education? Sloterdijk's Reading of Heidegger'sLetter on Humanism

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About