
English: 
hey guys
uh my name is avery rios
uh i'm a current graduate student of
computer science at
njit new jersey institute of technology
um
i i'm a graduate of kang university um
in union new jersey um and i studied
political science and economics there um
and today i i just want to
express my thoughts on this i want to
read this essay for you
um that i have uh it's called technology
and post humanism
and uh if uh you guys like it then
and hopefully it's good all right we're
going to start so
the 20th century caused classical
liberal ideals to be seen as in many
ways
the chimera of the decade uh the
structuralist movement of
the mid to late 20th century had found
itself in

English: 
Technology
and
Post-Humanism
The 20th century caused classical liberal
ideals to be seen as, in many ways, the chimera.
The structuralist movement of the mid to late

English: 
in quite the quite the quandary um
as foucaultian and durian schemas
systematically attacked our fundamental
tautological
assumptions the question that remained
was this
what is exactly the locus of power
described
in the history of sexuality michel
foucault
uh proposed in the late 1970s that
we as developed societies are under a
victorian
regime of truth a dominant
repressive and coercively
co-signatory process today
today even that a similar regime
dominates us
and the ways in which we are dominated
by discourses is more apparent now than
ever before
the fukuolian project

English: 
20th century had found itself in quite the
quandary. As Foucauldian and Derridean schemas
systematically attacked our fundamental tautological
assumptions, the question that remained was
this: what is, exactly, the locus of power
described? In “The History of Sexuality”,
Foucault proposed in the late 1976 that we
as developed societies are under a “Victorian”
regime of truth: a dominant, repressive, and
coercively cosignatory process. Today, a similar
regime dominates us today, and the ways in
which we are dominated by discourse is more

English: 
apparent now than ever before. The Foucauldian
project, regardless of the historicity and
the norms propounded within the domain of
public discourse, seeks to intellectually
liberate in the negative, or categorizing
by “absence” rather than the “presence”
of distinguishing features. This negative
interpretation of power relations is a powerful
methodology to systematically analyze institutions,
social structures, and even scientific disciplines.
In The Order of Things: An Archaeology of
the Human Sciences, Foucault proposes a particular
idea called the episteme. This concept most
specifically is that of how ordering and taxonomy

English: 
regardless of its historicity and the
norm propellant
within the domain of public discourse
seeks to intellectually liberate in the
negative
or categorizing by absence
rather than presence of distinguishing
features
this negative interpretation of power
relations
is a powerful methodology to
systematically
analyze institutions social structures
and even scientific disciplines in
the order of things and archaeology of
the human sciences
foucault proposes a
particular idea called the epistema
this concept it just most specifically
means that

English: 
create influential power structures. Foucault
writes: “Creating the fundamental codes
of a culture— those governing its language,
its schemas of perception, its exchanges,
its techniques, its values, the hierarchy
of practices.” In other words, the structures
that organize and classify knowledge are limited
by our own conceptual and intellectual purview.
How do you think we ensure in the future that
our representations of knowledge are as true
to reality as possible? How may we best direct
our collective energy and labor as a society
in order to fundamentally transform society
in radical ways? How can we best move scientific

English: 
uh of how ordering and how taxonomy
creates influential power structures
that permeate through society
for co-writes i
he was looking through creating the
fundamental codes of a culture
those governing its language its schemas
of perception
its exchanges its techniques its values
its a hierarchy of practices
in other words the structures that
organize and classify
knowledge are limited by our own
conceptual
and intellectual purview how do you
think
we ensure in the future that our
representations of knowledge are
true to reality as possible how
may we best direct our collective energy
and labor
as a society in order to fundamentally
transform it
in radical ways how can we best

English: 
move forward move scientific progress
forward
if we do not question our fundamental
philosophical assumptions
today for example the the modern
assumption in consumer society is that
financial freedom isn't in fact the type
of freedom
but what if this freedom was not a type
of freedom at all
what if the act of participating in the
market economy to become financially
liberated in fact
fetters one with iron shackles
as an introduction to my thought i will
explain the following
during my university studies i've
understood the realm of the
realm of ideas and intellectual history
in order to come to be able to create
new meaning or change
in our current institutional hegemonies
at a fundamental level
initially i'd been swayed by the

English: 
progress forward if we do not question our
fundamental assumptions?
Today, the modern assumption in consumerist
society is that financial freedom is, in fact,
actually a type of freedom. But what if this
freedom was not a type of freedom at all?
What if the act of participating in the market-economy
to become financially liberated, in fact,
fetters one with iron shackles? As an introduction
to my thought I will explain the following:,
during my university studies, I have understood
the realm of ideas in order to come to be
able create new meaning or change our current
institutional hegemonies at a fundamental

English: 
persuasive power of literature
precisely because literature mirrors our
innermost humanity uh
i had delved into navakov faulkner
hemingway mishima
george eliot so many
so many great artists and even so many
modern ones
yeah but um
so
oh okay so i i picked the authors
i wanted to read precisely in terms of
their difficulty
how else would i gain mastery over an
art
absalom absalom for example is is known
for having the longest sentence of
all in all the literature american
literature
if even
and is even more well known for being
the most difficult bug

English: 
level. Initially, I had been swayed by the
persuasive power of literature. I had delved
into Nabokov, Faulkner, Hemingway, Mishima,
and a slew of other artists whose works were
instrumental in introducing me to the realm
of ideas and possibilities. I had picked the
authors I wanted to read precisely in terms
of their difficulty; how else would I gain
mastery over an art? “Absalom, Absalom!”,
for example, is known for having the longest
sentence in all of literature 
and is even more well known for being the

English: 
of the nobel laureate avoir um
within the work an enigmatic stranger
named thomas sutman
erected a mansion in jefferson
mississippi
uh the power did but the power dynamics
of the book were very apparent
um it was not greedy then that that
drove sudpin but it was
envy um and his thirst for enemy never
absconded
um and it has not left our world either
however um which is the the substance of
what continues to drive my intellectual
project
um envy of wealth status
privilege of possessions even are all
functions of status seeking behavior
um so
as i became more depth of the craft i
trowed through the
notoriously dense literature i had
sharpened my mind as a result in
my mental faculties this however
was not enough i began to realize that
the multiplicity of possible
interpretations of a text greatly

English: 
most difficult book of the Nobel Laureate’s
oeuvre. Within the work, an enigmatic stranger
named Thomas Sutpen erected a mansion in Jefferson,
Mississippi. The power dynamics of the book
were apparent; it was not greed that drove
Sutpen but envy. His thirst for envy never
absconded— and it has not left our world
either, however, which is the substance of
what continues to drive my intellectual project.
Envy of wealth, status, privilege of possessions
even, are all functions of status-seeking
behavior. As I constructed my own stories,
I steadily became more adept at the craft.
As I troughed through notoriously dense literature,
I sharpened my mind and my mental faculties.
This, however, was not enough. I began to
realize that the multiplicity of possible
interpretations of a text greatly depends

English: 
on one particular purview. One can have fundamentally
violent reactions to the contents of literature
depending on their social, cultural, religious,
and philosophical purviews. I began to posit
that the system that governs and organizes
individuals ultimately depends upon those
who formed the ideas that created society.
I delved into philosophy for the first time.
I read from Rousseau, Hobbes, and Locke. I
had dissected passages from the tomes of Augustine,
Plato, and Aristotle. I became acquainted
with the existentialists (Nietzsche, Camus)
the sociological structuralists (Sassure,
Levi-Strauss), and the post-structuralists
(Foucault, Butler, Derrida, Deleuze). After
these years of academic productivity, I then

English: 
depends on
one particular purview one can have
fundamentally
violent reactions to the contents of
literature depending on their
social cultural religious and
philosophical purviews
i began to posit that the system that
governs and organizes individuals
ultimately depends on
those who formed the ideas that created
society
i delved into philosophy for the first
time
i had read from rousseau hobbs and i
dissected passages
from the tomes of augustine plato and
aristotle i became acquainted
with the existentialists nietzsche camus
sociological structurist
cesar levi strauss the
post-structuralists
foucault butler daddy da they lose
after these years of academic
productivity i then sought the
philosophies of the east
and then been exposed to buddhism and
islam

English: 
sought the philosophies of the east, and I
had been exposed to Buddhism
and Islam. Rumi, Dogen Zenji, Nagarjuna, Zhaozhou
Congshen, had
taught me about nonduality and insight. I
then studied the markets and the organization
of people within the scope of their labor
and productivity. Whilst this had been happening,
I then returned to society, social structures,
and institutions as my primary focus of study.
I used the teachings of the ancients and those
who have come before me to analytically dismantle

English: 
and hinduism and a multitude of variety
of
different
denominations or subcultures
within those domains um
and so uh i'm exposed to rumi
dogen zenji narahuna zhao shu
uh the from the record of joshu uh
we can look up as a pdf all this um
he he uh told me that they had taught me
about non-duality and
and insight um i then studied the
markets
in the organization of people within the
scope of their labor and productivity
while this was happening i then returned
to society's social structures and
institutions
as my primary focus of study um
i used the teachings of the ancients and
those who have
come before me to analytically dismantle
the dualistic and dialectical processes

English: 
the dualistic and dualistic dialectical processes
of Hegelianism, Marxism and Christianity.
Something “beyond good and evil” as Nietzsche
poignantly proposed. These hopes and ambitions
were still underway, however during the stunning
upset in the 2016 United States’ presidential
election I had seemingly lost all hope. Were
the emotions of the masses (which had been
historically warranted up to that point, regardless)
truly what was swaying voters? Why was demagoguery
still so effective in the 21st century? If
evolution rather than revolution is the future
fate of political systems, how can we transform
capitalism into a system that possesses and

English: 
of
hegelianism marxism christianity
something beyond good and evil as
nietzsche
poignantly presumed proposed these hopes
and ambitions were still underway
over during the stunning upset
in the 2016 united states presidential
election
i seemingly lost all hope
and my thoughts on donald trump and all
that
is just
i uh
the demagoguery will always exist as
long as there are
people who allow it
and um this is why philosophy is
is an action it's a mode of being
it's a way of living it's a
it's a life of contemplation and of
analysis
and reflection and that is what makes a
philosopher

English: 
uh not their degree um
as what many people might assume and in
some sense we all are amateur
philosophers in a very broad sense
um so okay and
so there are many ideas in the state of
economics that were useful to me to
understand um
as any truly serious thinker does
would um however the the one
truly important answer that i found was
that
technologies were at the forefront of
what is both
economically and socially attainable in
the material world
uh the substance that shifts paradigms
and
causes revolutions that became
indisputably too many as technological
advancement
like star wars and cinematographic
technological advancement and
the data science and meticulous

English: 
reflects our Humanistic ideals? I then logically
went to study economics, attempting to learn
to find a solution to these problems.
There were many ideas in the study of economics
that was useful for me to understand— as
any truly serious thinker does; however, the
one truly important answer that I found was
that technologies were at the forefront of
what is economically and socially attainable
in the material world. The substance that
shifts paradigms and causes revolutions, then,
became indisputably to many as technological
advancement. At this point, I was nearing
my own graduation of my undergraduate studies

English: 
computerized sections of research that
for example allowed
thomas piketty to write capital uh which
is a brilliant book that i
uh on the csn i learned python to
intermediate level
give or take i'm still trash
honestly as well as understanding
algorithms data structures databases and
networks
um i self-educated by watching countless
videos
read multiple textbooks which is really
important textbooks are
brilliant like
like good textbook is just so brilliant
like uh
the o'reilly textbook for python uh
learning python is just a brilliant
textbook that is
really like well done honestly
um and so
so now i'm uh and i read a copious
amount of secondary literature and
secondary literature is important
because it circumvents the
the language barrier of private
intellectuals private elite

English: 
and I could not afford to change my studies
to the hard sciences. That being said, I learned
the fundamental concepts on my own. By the
time I graduated with my Bachelor of Arts
in Political Science and Economics, I had
been an autodidact of Computer Science for
roughly a year and one of Mathematics for
2. In that year, I covered the mathematical
topics of Calculus, Linear Algebra, Differential
Equations and Discrete Mathematics during
my own time. On the CS end, I studied python
to an intermediate level, learned software
engineering principles, as well as understanding
algorithms, data structures, databases, and

English: 
intellectuals and and the layperson
um and so secondary literature you know
thinkers talking about thinkers is
actually very important um and so
now i'm entering a master's degree in
computer science after doing my
bachelor's in political science and
economics
at the new jersey institute of
technology i'm at the stage
in which i'm realizing that
as a serious thinker the way in which my
questions are
asked fundamentally
shape the possibility of answers i may
receive
refining the philosophical and
scientific method understanding the
realm of ideas
and appreciating the immense nuance of
navigating the domain of
the human and natural sciences will only
further embolden
our biggest questions what is the nature
of our universe
what are the substrates that

English: 
networks. I had self-educated by watching
countless videos, read multiple textbooks
and copious amounts of secondary literature
to fully round out my understanding. Now entering
a master’s degree in computer science at
the New Jersey Institute of Technology, I
am at the stage in in which I am realizing
that as a serious thinker, the way in which
my questions are asked fundamentally shape
the possibility of answers I may receive.
Refining the philosophical and scientific
method, understanding the realm of ideas,
and appreciating the immense nuance of navigating
the domain of the human and natural sciences
will only further embolden our biggest questions;
what is the nature of our universe? What are

English: 
foundationally form conscious experience
is language truly biologically innate
or morals truly relative is artificial
general
intelligence possible are nanoscale
robotics truly feasible
these are questions that we should ask
and uh the true freedom in the 21st
century
will not be that of attaining wealth or
realizing
universal utopian illusions the the
political left and right
are currently in disarray in the united
states for example
is within this space of openness i
believe that will lead us
to a new era of enlightenment in the
information age
with the decline in our faith in the
perfectability of institutions
our political and economic discourses
have been dismantled
or assumptions of the world and the
taxonomies in which the organized fields

English: 
the substrates that foundationally form conscious
experience? Is language truly biologically
innate? Are morals truly relative? Is artificial
general intelligence possible? Are nanoscale
robotics truly feasible?
The true freedom in the 21st century, will
not be that of attaining wealth or realizing
universal utopian illusions. The political
Left and Right are in disarray. It is within
this space of openness I believe will lead
us to a new Era of Enlightenment in the Information
Age. With the decline in our faith in the
perfectibility of institutions, our political
and economic discourses have been dismantled.
Our assumptions of the world and the taxonomies
in which we organize fields and disciplines

English: 
of knowledge remain bare. Our grand metanarratives
of history have been washed away. Many of
the seemingly invisible power relations throughout
history have been brought to fruition in the
public discourse. With seemingly limitless
information and billions of data points to
systematically analyze, the question in the
21st century is not “What will we build?”
but “Why?”. Why should we build it, and
what will be its consequences, both materially
and metaphysically? How can we feel more human
in a world of rationally explained mechanistic
systems? What is beyond our deterministic
subjectification of ourselves? What are our
new ethics for the 21st century, in a world
artificial intelligences and gene editing
exist? Why have our technologies and systems
of knowledge have extended so far beyond the

English: 
and disciplines of knowledge remain
remain bare our grand meta narratives of
history have been washed away
many of the seemingly invisible pop the
seemingly invisible power relations
throughout history
have been brought to fruition in the
public discourse
we seemingly limit this information and
billions of data points to
systematically analyze the question
the question of the 21st century is not
what will we build
but why why should we build it
and what will be its consequences both
materially
and metaphysically how can we feel more
human in a world of rationally explained
mechanistic systems
what is beyond our deterministics
objectification of ourselves
what are our new ethics for the 21st
century in
a world of artificial a world where
artificial intelligence and gene editing
exist why have our technologies and
systems
of knowledge have extended so far beyond

English: 
more nuanced concerns of daily reality?
We have been thrusted into the throes of posthumanism
without even realizing it. The current coronavirus
pandemic has massively accelerated the control
structures of the elite technology corporations.
This new era of the Information Age, then,
is the death of the individual: of both man
and woman. Not as a species or rational being.
Neither of the man as an object or a thing
of nature, but precisely man of a purely academic
and intellectual sense. A man of a purely
liberal sense— perhaps more specifically,
the classical liberal sense of the modality
of intellectualism. Roughly 75% of all academic

English: 
the more nuanced
concerns of daily reality
we have been thrusted into the throes of
post-humanism
without even realizing it the
current coronavirus pandemic has
massively accelerated the control
structures
of the elite technology corporations
this new era of the information age then
seems to be
the death of the individual of both men
and
uh not as a species not even as a
species or rational being
neither of of of the man is
an object or a thing of nature but
precisely man of a purely academic
and intellectual sense an individual of
a purely liberal sense perhaps more
specifically than the classical liberal
sense of intellectualism
roughly for example in the united states
75 of all academic professorships at

English: 
non-profit and for-profit universities
in the united states for example are
currently not tenure track a distinction
that enables academics to talk more
freely about
their thoughts and interests about
without fear of prosecution or in
instability in the 21st century our
ins our university institutions these
same ones that maximize on the profits
rather than embracing intellectualism
seemingly based on the data are the very
places where ideas go to die
our arts and entertainment and the
zizekian
ideologies behind them of which are
mostly diffused upon computer screens
have suffered uh many among us would
would look upon these devices more than
spend the nights in
with an ancient tome of wisdom
historically as we go through
intellectual history a thinker such as
foucault
revealed to us the way our societies
discipline us

English: 
professorships at non-profit and for-profit
universities in the United States, for example,
are currently not tenure track— a distinction
that enables academics to talk more freely
about their thoughts and interests without
fear of prosecution or instability. In the
21st century our dilapidating university institutions—
these same ones that maximize on the profits
rather than embracing intellectualism— are
the very places where ideas go to die. Our
arts our entertainment and the Zizekian ideologies
behind them of which are mostly diffused upon
computer screens, have suffered. Many among
us would look upon these devices more than
spend a night’s inn with an ancient tome
of wisdom.
Historically, as we go through intellectual
history, thinkers such as Foucault revealed

English: 
uh internalize those mechanisms of
discipline and create a hegemony of
culture
thinkers like chomsky have laid out to
how our consent is only
ultimately manufactured uh the great
right-wing
libertarian theories have ended exam
argument the argument of what a rational
agent
in the economy should live should look
like or be
um advancements by peter theater and
nudge theory have greatly challenged the
use case
of the rational agent in analytical ends
uh net now as we live in what i feel is
a deleuzian control society
um we may finally understand that there
is no way out other
than radical revolution (revolution from the inside of the organizations, specifically) or
one where one in which
one would want to be free from the
fetters of the information age
and its tenets that are doubly
propounded by financial institutions

English: 
to us the way our societies discipline us
and attempt to create a hegemony of culture;
thinkers like Chomsky have laid points to
how our consent is ultimately manufactured
. The great right-libertarian theories have
ended the argument of what a rational agent
in the economy should look like be. Advancements
by Peter Thaler and Nudge Theory have greatly
challenged the use case of the rational agent
in analytical ends. Now, as we— currently
living in a Deleuzian “control society”
— we may finally understand there is no
way out other than radical revolution if one
were to want to be free from the fetters of
the information age and its tenets that are
doubly propounded by financial, government,

English: 
governments and technology institutions
uh this is the end as the
post-structuralists
naturally assumed the the death of of man
perhaps the death of
uh of man as as um
in the post-humanist sense
in the sense that the culprits
of the controls of the control
structures now
are now ourselves we are the culprits
we are the ones inflicting the power
structures
among ourselves why why i will tell you
uh the data we produce on a daily basis
uh over the years of our life are all
reduced to
numbers in the computerized system our
social security is our bank accounts
and the number of zeros on the balances
of our mortgages
uh one's first reaction is to initially
engage in

English: 
and technology institutions.. This is the
end, as the poststructuralists naturally assumed;
the death of the individual, in the sense
that the culprits of the control structures
around us now are ourselves. It is the flaws
of human nature, the flaws of the things that
we design, the inherent inequalities among
the order of things. The data we produce on
a daily basis, over the years of our life
are all reduced to numbers in a computerized
system: our social security’s, our bank
accounts, and the number of zeros on the balances
of our mortgages. One’s first reaction,
however, is to initially engage in a Mersaultian

English: 
revolt. But how can revolt against technologies
that are not only useful, but necessary in
these dangerous times? In the times of the
Coronavirus, technology seems like more of
an asset than a hindrance. But one may inquire
about when will computers own us. The truth
is the computers are already part of us in
so many ways. It is this abstract symbiosis
between man and machine, where one stares
for hours into the abysses of its screen and
haunts the very fabric of our being. And it
frightens us— not because it controls us,
or because we realize we are too attached
to them. The fear is a mirror; as Nietzsche poignantly proclaimed:  "if one stares

English: 
a mersultan revolt but
how can revolt against technologies
that are not only useful but necessary
in these dangerous times
in the times of coronavirus technology
seems more like an asset than hindrance
but
one may inquire about when the computers
own us
there the truth is
the computers are already part of us in
so many ways it is this
abstract symbiosis between man and
machine where
one stares for hours into the abysses of
its screen and
haunts the very fabric of our being and
frightens us not because it controls us
or
because we realize that we're too
attached to them
the fear is the mirror
as nietzsche point poignantly claimed
that
if one stares into the abyss the

English: 
abyss stares into you
the truth is that the computer is us in
a very
metaphysical sense in a very literal
sense; competing theories
for explaining the mind have now
been reduced to
connectionist systems (computational theory of mind, See Steven Pinker) and
this is a haunting process
it's something that we have to work on
some of the books i used to make this
video
were the sublime object of ideology by
Slavoj Zizek
discipline and punish the birth of the
prison by Michel Foucault
Manufacturing Consent by Noam Chomsky
Capitalism and Freedom by Milton
Friedman
postscript on societies of control by
Gilles Deleuze
and the stranger by Albert Camus

English: 
and so i like to end this video um and
if you liked
please leave a like and if you want to
see more of these videos please
subscribe
uh this is the first time making this
video and i'm probably going to leave it
more so unedited because
i have a lot to do currently teaching
myself like
three programming like three programming
languages
good night also if you want to
um read more about things that
i i'm saying or things i'm doing um
check out my blog um i uh
that the essay that i i spoke out
was maybe two blog posts
so
yeah but there's a lot of different
content on there that you can still

English: 
into the abyss, the abyss stares into you".
The truth is that the computer *is* us in a very metaphysical sense, in a very literal sense. Competing theories for explaining the mind have now been reduced to connectionist systems (Steven Pinker)
a very metaphysical sense, and
it is haunting.

English: 
watch so thank you
