This Better Work

href="file:///C:%5CUsers%5CBrian%5CAppData%5CLocal%5CTemp%5Cmsohtmlclip1%5C01%5Cclip_filelist.xml">

Over the last few weeks, many of the books and discussions in class have caused me to question the notion of 'I.' It appears that the being one would describe as a person, is in fact comprised of multiple entities, personalities, wishes, needs.

Early in The Filth, I began to think that Ned Slade was the manifestation of Greg Feely's desires, a sexy escape for a boring man who watches too much porn. Tony the cat was the one desirable 'real' thing in Greg's life, is why he was always drawn back to Greg's life. However after the discovery that there is nothing particular special about Tony, as he is simply many cats, we find that Greg's life is no more 'real' than Ned's.

I feel that this is where the notion of multiple facets of 'I' come into play. The importance or specificity of what 'real life' is, is questioned by the Ned/Greg dichotomy. It is unclear who existed first, Ned or Greg. And it doesn't really matter because neither are possible without the existence of the other.

If we look at this when discussing the 'cyborg' phenomenon that exists presently and will only continue to do so, I think we will find that the argument of how much we should allow technology to replace our own genetic hardware, and thus our daily lives, is far more convoluted than we often realize. Who is to say what 'reality' or 'humanness' really is? Certainly when attempting to define what is human, we can hardly find a definition that really excludes technology, and likewise much of technology mirrors humanness. And rightly so, because as humans throughout history have created and defined what technology is, they have simultaneously evolved , biologically and socially, along with their creations.

I would argue that a necessary part of every person's life is some level of technology that is integral to the way they go about living. And thus, trying to hold on to a certain level of humanness is in fact missing the point of what we value in people. We don't value others on a genetic level or how much their lives are not controlled by technology. We generally value others on their goodness, intelligence trustworthiness, and the like. Those who fear losing humanity to technology should re-evaluate what being a human is, and holding on to what is really valuable, rather than that which is merely tangible.