Humanist Discussion Group, Vol. 14, No. 705.
Centre for Computing in the Humanities, King's College London
<http://www.princeton.edu/~mccarty/humanist/>
<http://www.kcl.ac.uk/humanities/cch/humanist/>
[1] From: John Lavagnino <John.Lavagnino@kcl.ac.uk> (9)
Subject: Re: more than defecating ducks
[2] From: Ambroise BARRAS <ambroise.barras@bluewin.ch> (7)
Subject: Re: 14.0700 automata
[3] From: "Norman D. Hinton" <hinton@springnet1.com> (24)
Subject: Re: 14.0700 automata
[4] From: Steven Robinson <Robinsons@BrandonU.CA> (34)
Subject: Vaucanson's Duck
--[1]------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 01 Mar 2001 16:41:08 +0000
From: John Lavagnino <John.Lavagnino@kcl.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: more than defecating ducks
There's a classic work on Vaucanson and computers (and also on Buster
Keaton, Samuel Beckett, Andy Warhol, the Royal Society, Wyndham Lewis,
Alan Turing, Alexander Pope, and many other subjects): The
Counterfeiters by Hugh Kenner, originally published in 1968. You may
or may not agree with the ideas in the book (about satire and
simulation and forgery and pretending to be something other than what
you are: pretending to be human, for example) but it's unquestionably
a wonderful museum full of fascinating exhibits.
John Lavagnino
Centre for Computing in the Humanities, King's College London
--[2]------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 01 Mar 2001 16:41:50 +0000
From: Ambroise BARRAS <ambroise.barras@bluewin.ch>
Subject: Re: 14.0700 automata
would recommand those two entries in the extensive bibliography about
history of automata.
COHEN, John (1966). Human robots in Myth and Science. London: George Allen &
Unwin Ltd.
BRETON, Philippe (1995). l'image de l'Homme. Du Golem aux cratures
virtuelles. Paris: Seuil|Science ouverte
Yours, kindly
Ambroise Barras
--[3]------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 01 Mar 2001 16:44:22 +0000
From: "Norman D. Hinton" <hinton@springnet1.com>
Subject: Re: 14.0700 automata
WIllard, in 1968 a show was mounted at the Museum of Modern Art in New
York titled "The Machine as Seen at the End of the Mechanical Age" which
traced the development of the machine including 'self-destroying
artifacts', and a bewildering variety of 'real'; machines, automata
(both artistic and otherwise) and their involvement with the arts.
Almost the last item in the exhibit was a very crude -- by today's
standards -- reproduction of a photograph (it looks to have been done by
some variation of the Dither method), with a quote from Jascha
Reichardt, from an exhibit in London (see below), "...one cannot deny
that the computer demonstrates a radical extension in art media and
techniques. The possibilities inherent in the computer as a creative
tool will do little to change those idioms of art which rely primarily
on the dialogue between the artist, his ideas, and the canvas. They
will, however, increase the scope of art and contribute to its
diversity."
The MOMA exhibit is memorialized in the Catalog, published by MOMA under
the name of the exhibit and was written by K. G. Pontus Hulten. I have
a copy, which I bought at the exhibit...it is now somewhat of a rarity,
but copies are found listed for sale in places like www.bibliofind.com.
It is a fine piece of work, with metal covers, and is itself perhaps an
item in its own exhibit.
THe London exhibit was titled _Cybernetic Serendipity_, was held at the
Institute of Contemporary aRts in the Fall of 1968, and the catalog was
published as a special issue of "Studio International", in London,
1968. It is probably easier to find over there than here in mid-USA.
--[4]------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 01 Mar 2001 16:45:30 +0000
From: Steven Robinson <Robinsons@BrandonU.CA>
Subject: Vaucanson's Duck
Hello Willard,
.. .... Forgive me if you're already familiar with what I
am about to tell you. I use La Mettrie's *Man a Machine* in my intro
philosophy course as a follow-up to Descartes and a nice contrast to
Leibniz. Interestingly, they both lend themselves very well to present-day
computing phenomena: for Leibniz it's virtual reality and the Internet
(monad-to-monad, with God as the 'server'); for La Mettrie it is machine
intelligence.
Anyway, I just thought I'd quote you a few lines from La Mettrie, where he
makes a connection you'd be interested in:
"Man is to apes and the most intelligent animals what Huygen's planetary
pendulum is to a watch of Julien le Roy. If more instruments, wheelwork,
and springs are required to show the movements of the planets than to mark
and repeat the hours, if Vaucanson needed more art to make his
*flute-player* than his *duck*, he would need even more to make a *talker*,
which can no longer be regarded as impossible, particularly in the hands of
a new Prometheus."
It is his suggestion of the "talker" of course, that is so striking and
ahead of his time. Of course, as he is says, it just follows automatically
from the materialist thesis he is putting forward. If minds are machines
then there is no reason in principle why we couldn't build one out of raw
materials, like Vaucanson's Duck.
I quoted that from the Hackett edition, tr. Watson & Rybalka, 1994.
Cheers,
Steve Robinson
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dr. Steven Robinson
Assistant Professor
Philosophy Department
Brandon University
Brandon, Manitoba
R7A 6A9 CANADA
(204)727-9718
<ROBINSONS@BrandonU.Ca>
FAX: (204) 726-0473
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Thu Mar 01 2001 - 12:15:57 EST