What do you think?
Rate this book
Guides for the Perplexed
Posthumanism: A Guide for the Perplexed
In A Guide for the Perplexed, Peter Mahon goes beyond recent theoretical approaches to 'the posthuman' to argue for a concrete posthumanism, which arises as humans, animals and technology become entangled, in science, society and culture. Concrete posthumanism is rooted in cutting-edge advances in techno-science, and this book offers readers an exciting, fresh and innovative exploration of this undulating, and often unstable, terrain. With wide-ranging coverage, of cybernetics, information theory, medicine, genetics, machine learning, politics, science fiction, philosophy and futurology, Mahon examines how posthumanism played-and continues to play-a crucial role in shaping how we understand our world. This analysis of posthumanism centers on human interactions with tools and technology, the centrality of science, as well as an understanding of techno-science as a pharmakon-an ancient Greek word for a substance that is both poison and cure. Mahon argues that posthumanism must be approached with an interdisciplinary a concrete posthumanism is only graspable through knowledge derived from science and the humanities. He concludes by sketching a 'post-humanities' to help us meet the challenges of posthumanism, challenges to which we all must A Guide for the Perplexed provides a concise, detailed and coherent exploration of posthumanism, introducing key approaches, concepts and themes. It is ideal for readers of all stripes who are interested in a concrete posthumanism and require more than just a simple introduction.
- GenresPhilosophyTechnology
344 pages, Kindle Edition
Published February 23, 2017
3 people are currently reading
62 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews
Read
December 10, 2019Like all worthwhile “travel” guides not all the sights available are covered in one tour – just the most significant – leaving us to explore the “side streets” on our own. Mahon’s guide highlights the various sights of interest for the contemporary philosophical inquirer whose vision has been whetted to explore further what Mahon has introduced in this deeply researched and copiously noted book. My review is limited to a few observations that from my perspective I hope will encourage others to consider his research. It is not the last word on posthumanism, as he has noted, but is certainly cutting-edge thought, as I understand him.
There is more that constitutes us humans than just ourselves, as traditionally understood from a classical Western philosophy, if Mahon’s exposé of “concrete” posthumanism is correct. Religion, politics and philosophy are being rewritten as we enter the posthuman stage of an evolutionary process, he has suggested. In this evolutionary process, his “unit of analysis” is “humans + tools,” not just humans. In analyzing this unit, he has placed emphasis on the boundary between “human” and “tools,” which is increasingly becoming blurred. What is significant is that such blurring of boundaries (not merely a shifting of boundaries) opens the possibility for us to do consciously, in the posthuman stage of evolution, what we thought nature did unconsciously in the classical stage of evolution. In short, we as “humans + tools” consciously direct our evolution in the posthuman world. That is one conclusion I draw from his essay. Secondly, the unit “humans + tools” constitutes a changed status (within a philosophical point of view) of human beings from that of being mere creatures of another entity or entities to being “co-creators” of themselves.
Active engagement, not passive representationalism, is the key here as I understand Mahon. He writes: “I have been endeavouring to give you a concrete sense of posthumanism that actively seeks to avoid getting stuck at the superficial level of ‘representations’ or ‘images’ or ‘metaphors’ of science and technology through an insistence on engaging actively with actual techno-scientific developments and research” (p. 155). Representations, images and metaphors constitute the classical philosophical perspective, (inspired by Hellenic philosophy) whereas, engaging actively with actual techno-scientific developments and research characterize the posthuman context (inspired by attempts at existential dehellenization) as I see it.
Has he succeeded with this guide? I asked myself this question in preparing this review. What overall success there may be that I do not know. But he has succeeded in clarifying for me some of the same issues that I had been pondering. The follow-up question (to myself since I am retired and no longer engaged in active teaching) was: So, what’s next? To write this review I answered. On the presumption that a review is to assist the potential reader in making a decision for or against reading a book, I offer the following suggestions to potential readers. 1) Readers and future reviewers should note the subjunctive tense throughout the guide – nothing is truly fixed and options remain. 2) Brush up on classical or humanist philosophical concepts (if needed) to bring Mahon’s understanding of concrete posthumanism into sharper relief. 3) Heed his advice to persevere with the difficult concepts he discusses; the more information the better the understanding. 4) Read this guide as the author’s attempt to put order into chaos – which was the same purpose made by classicists at their particular stage of human evolutionary self-knowledge. 5) Mahon’s presentation of concrete posthumanism suggests engaging techno-scientific “reality.” Deeper probing and further clarification are needed into techno-scientific reality à la Leslie Dewart, particularly for the more philosophically minded reader, which considers the possibility of reality “beyond being.” In critiquing our Hellenic heritage Dewart has suggested that “being” and “reality” are not always to be identified. Reality may be conceived of as that which is somehow “beyond being,” and not being itself, which to my mind is characteristic of a posthuman stage of self-knowledge. As I understand him then, “to be, or not to be (human),” characterizes the posthuman context that his guide encourages us to navigate.
There is more that constitutes us humans than just ourselves, as traditionally understood from a classical Western philosophy, if Mahon’s exposé of “concrete” posthumanism is correct. Religion, politics and philosophy are being rewritten as we enter the posthuman stage of an evolutionary process, he has suggested. In this evolutionary process, his “unit of analysis” is “humans + tools,” not just humans. In analyzing this unit, he has placed emphasis on the boundary between “human” and “tools,” which is increasingly becoming blurred. What is significant is that such blurring of boundaries (not merely a shifting of boundaries) opens the possibility for us to do consciously, in the posthuman stage of evolution, what we thought nature did unconsciously in the classical stage of evolution. In short, we as “humans + tools” consciously direct our evolution in the posthuman world. That is one conclusion I draw from his essay. Secondly, the unit “humans + tools” constitutes a changed status (within a philosophical point of view) of human beings from that of being mere creatures of another entity or entities to being “co-creators” of themselves.
Active engagement, not passive representationalism, is the key here as I understand Mahon. He writes: “I have been endeavouring to give you a concrete sense of posthumanism that actively seeks to avoid getting stuck at the superficial level of ‘representations’ or ‘images’ or ‘metaphors’ of science and technology through an insistence on engaging actively with actual techno-scientific developments and research” (p. 155). Representations, images and metaphors constitute the classical philosophical perspective, (inspired by Hellenic philosophy) whereas, engaging actively with actual techno-scientific developments and research characterize the posthuman context (inspired by attempts at existential dehellenization) as I see it.
Has he succeeded with this guide? I asked myself this question in preparing this review. What overall success there may be that I do not know. But he has succeeded in clarifying for me some of the same issues that I had been pondering. The follow-up question (to myself since I am retired and no longer engaged in active teaching) was: So, what’s next? To write this review I answered. On the presumption that a review is to assist the potential reader in making a decision for or against reading a book, I offer the following suggestions to potential readers. 1) Readers and future reviewers should note the subjunctive tense throughout the guide – nothing is truly fixed and options remain. 2) Brush up on classical or humanist philosophical concepts (if needed) to bring Mahon’s understanding of concrete posthumanism into sharper relief. 3) Heed his advice to persevere with the difficult concepts he discusses; the more information the better the understanding. 4) Read this guide as the author’s attempt to put order into chaos – which was the same purpose made by classicists at their particular stage of human evolutionary self-knowledge. 5) Mahon’s presentation of concrete posthumanism suggests engaging techno-scientific “reality.” Deeper probing and further clarification are needed into techno-scientific reality à la Leslie Dewart, particularly for the more philosophically minded reader, which considers the possibility of reality “beyond being.” In critiquing our Hellenic heritage Dewart has suggested that “being” and “reality” are not always to be identified. Reality may be conceived of as that which is somehow “beyond being,” and not being itself, which to my mind is characteristic of a posthuman stage of self-knowledge. As I understand him then, “to be, or not to be (human),” characterizes the posthuman context that his guide encourages us to navigate.
August 4, 2018
Very advanced. What I could understand was at times fascinating and other times frightening.
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews