POSTHUMANISM AND ASSISTIVE TECHNOLOGIES: ON THE SOCIAL INCLUSION/EXCLUSION OF LOW-TECH CYBORGS

• Autor(a) principal: Kath,Elizabeth
• Data de Publicação: 2019
• Outros Autores: Guimarães Neto,Osorio Coelho, Buzato,Marcelo El Khouri
• Tipo de documento: Artigo
• Idioma: eng
• Título da fonte: Trabalhos em Lingüística Aplicada (Online)
• Texto Completo: http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0103-18132019000200679
• topic: low-tech cyborgs; disability; social inclusion

ABSTRACT In this paper, we elaborate on the consequences of a post-humanist perspective to the problem of physical disability by approaching the use of assistive technologies (AT) by disabled people as the introduction of a low-tech cyborg in the world. In doing so, we highlight examples of communication ATs and provide analogies between ATs and languages in the constitution of selves and social contexts. ATs are informed ideologically, so they can be seen both as a way to “fix” an “impaired” person, or as a strategy to overcome a physical and social context that disables some people and makes other people “able-bodied”. We argue that becoming a low-tech cyborg can be a form of social inclusion if we understand disability to be produced by the context, rather than as an inherent dysfunctionality of the individual. Based on this assumption, we identify two strategies of social inclusion of the low-tech cyborg: disembodiment of the Self, and embodied virtuality. We remark, however, that low-tech cyborgs can be configured out of necessity or choice and add that the same socioeconomic factors that produce inequality in general are also active in the social exclusion/inclusion of the low-tech cyborg. Thus, ATs can be adopted and transformed by choice so as to broaden the gap between cyborg haves and have nots, while both kinds of cyborgs can become increasingly subject to cognitive and affective exploitation in the context of cognitive capitalism. We conclude that the potential of a post-humanist perspective to disability should not be about making “impaired humans” integer, nor making “integer humans” more than human, but keeping selves ethically connected with others whether by virtual embodiment or embodied virtuality.