I find this a very constrained and deterministic model of being. There is no space here at all for a view of self as social construct, of embodiment as representation, mind as social instance, language as infrastructure of self. The reductive self you are proposing would be of little interest to any artist as a subject. What epistemological or ontological framework are you following in putting forward your vision of self? On what grounds are you proposing that machines share this? Regards Simon Simon Biggs Research Professor edinburgh college of art s.biggs@xxxxxxxxx www.eca.ac.uk simon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx www.littlepig.org.uk AIM/Skype: simonbiggsuk From: Jeannette Ginslov <ginslov@xxxxxxxxx> Organization: Walking Gusto Productions Reply-To: <ginslov@xxxxxxxxx> Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2008 13:05:37 +0200 To: <dance-tech@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> Subject: [dance-tech] Re: post / choreographic I will try to explain what I mean by the dancer becoming an ³enfleshed machine². ³I² exist in thought and body, in flesh and vapor, blood and tissue, in electrical impulses, synapses and secretions, tissue and fluids, membranes that encase my memory, history and sense of self, and I respond to the outside world, whether physically, emotionally or intellectually through these physical and mechanical constructs. They are as man-made as the machine. We are not so different from the cold silver casing of the lap top in front of me, just a bit more physically fragile in the encasing.