September 27, 2018
Kristensen’s Foucault Bio-Power and Biopolitics made me think of my assigned topic, Neurohacking, because of a theme my ideas kept tying back to:
What do we as a society value and consider “normal” neuro-activity and behavior?
You can see how a lot of my thoughts kept returning to the “what do we value” bubble. My classmates even added on to the thought that we’re hacking our brains to edge closer to “perfection” and away from social taboo:
According to Kristensen, Foucault was interested in the power dynamics and subjectivities created by social systems and:
On what ground certain subjectivities are more legitimate, normal and desirable while others are marginalized or excluded. In what ways relations of power-knowledge affect to the ways in which the order of things is divided according to normal and abnormal.
What interests me about the current Neurohacking movement — from Nootropics to transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) — is how we’re deciding which parts of our brains need improvement. Is it based on what the current technology is capable of? Do governments and corporations drive its development through the money they redirect to research and development? Or is it simply consumer demand to be able to learn a new language faster? I’ve generated three possible ideas from these questions and thoughts to pursue in this class:
NYU ITP documentation blog.
Words are my own.