bition can provide a way to reflect on the power inherent in technology and the responsibility that we have in terms of implementing it and determining who and what we leverage it against. That is also a point that needs to be considered as we confront the Cognitive Revolution if we’re to find our way to a better future than the future wrought by the Industrial Revolution. Any technology can either dehumanise us or make us more human by enhancing our abilities and focusing our bodies and minds. The hand axe, for instance, really made us who and what we are today, but there are many ways in which technology can get out of hand and become a controlling factor. Once again, the smartphone comes to mind.
José We are already in a realm where artificial intelligence is taking up more and more space in our daily lives. Now, imagine that we are capable of replicating all our brain and cognitive processes – one day those machines will be here, but will we allow them to become independent? I am not afraid that they will become superhumans, because our brain is only what it is because of the bodies that we have, with all of the body’s attendant limitations. We make a number of decisions in determining what form a machine takes, so what I am putting on the table is that it is up to us what kind of cognitive revolution lies ahead of humankind. During the Industrial Revolution, everything was driven by money – who can build the biggest machine in order to produce more and faster than anybody else – and we now know what that brought: many good things, but also very many bad things. Now, we face very real threats, so we need to design not only with the bright side of the coin in mind, but with the dark side of the moon too.
Jonathon When designing the machines, I was thinking about the long history of the orrery, an instrument which was a model of the universe as it was understood in the 1700s and 1800s. Orreries not only allowed for scientific study, but also for philosophical contemplation of the universe as a clockwork mechanism which had significant religious implications. I wanted to borrow from this tradition of the philosophical instrument, and that purely mental interaction where a machine is there to help augment your thought processes. It seems that an exhibition space can be reflective, but only if the exhibited mechanism is detached from some sort of external purpose or practicalities. The space has to become a self-contained world that operates according to its own internal logic and has its own self-reinforcing aesthetic. That is one of the reasons why we chromed these machines. Having a set of machines that are immaculate allows for a relationship with them that is not industrial – you wouldn’t chrome these machines if you were using them to operate a mill, for instance. By chroming them, the physical work that they can do is undercut by their immaculate finish: this perfection can only exist as long as we are in the space of doing philosophy, as opposed to milling wood. This allows for a relationship that is not industrial and which is ultimately otherworldly. It doesn’t belong to any particular place or time, and as a result it allows for that kind of movement back and forth between the Industrial Revolution and the Cognitive Revolution, as well as an extrapolation forward in time.
José In my lab, we don’t put too much effort into the final product – if you produce things that are too rigid, you are constraining, not helping, research. Having said that, something I am particularly proud of is the fact that we put a lot of attention to detail into how the subjects of the research in our lab – people with physical disabilities – interact with systems that allow them to regain control of parts of their body. When they interact with the final machine, it is seamless. When you’re in front of these Mental Work machines, you feel like you’re reflecting upon them, and they’re conveying back the mental effort you’re putting in. It’s a kind of mirror, which is a powerful image because a basic principle for acquiring brain-control 