STATEMENT

“Art, being language, by definition is a technological expression.”

The fundamental quality of Homo sapiens resides in the organizational communication of giving agreed meaning to abstract objects (specific intersubjective objects) such as the notions of “nation”, “money”, “human rights”, “community” or “God”, among others. human rights”, and thus follow the almost inexhaustible structures, codes, norms and possibilities of cultural interaction derived from these objects. This quality precedes the use of tools or the manipulation of natural phenomena, since the social genesis of the species demands a cooperative understanding that orbits the transmission, towards “the other” (another human), of shared values that represent security and survival. That is to say, before gathering at night around a fire, it was necessary to conceive, beyond instinct, that the abstract concept of “community” was associated with greater possibilities of survival and, above all, that this survival had a direct correlation with the notion of belonging to the group and the tribal understanding of a hierarchy within it, This formed a bijective relationship with the perception of the “individual” (which shortly afterwards would derive in the notion of the “I”), because one can only recognize a similar one, or a group of similar ones, as long as one recognizes oneself, and it is in this distinction that an immeasurable load of meaning was poured into both ways of experiencing existence; such was the beginning of symbolic language (an exceptionally rare particularity among sentient beings).

The scenario described above (it is pertinent to note) was further enriched by the concatenation of anatomical and physiological trades that are specific to our species, adding to them the neurological and cognitive visual relationship and the capacity for vocal articulation to express the understanding of the perceived biotic and abiotic environment, resulting in the construction of symbols (and the use of these) to conceive forms that represent and communicate ideas, notions, concepts, quantities, reasons, strategies or stories that explain The World.

This natural interweaving of the biological, evolutionary and historical variables of our species and its relationship with the environment, preceded the synthetic figure of Culture, from which was born the creation of utilitarian tools and objects of value appreciated in the social community (i.e. objects – of any kind, from images to weapons or jewelry – to which an agreed value was conferred through the significance they could represent). And it is in this synthetic structure (Culture) that the nascent technical skill (“artis” or “ars”) for the creation of objects representing symbols to communicate complex messages, (a knowledge or “logos”) is wielded as a tool per se that unifies the social community, holding on to legible codes from which emanates a guideline of survival. Therefore, it would not be wrong to affirm that, in their core, technology and art are the same human behavior, even their similarity can be observed in the root of their meanings; tekné, (as has been said) is the artis, the craft or technique (a knowledge that “operates”), which is added to logos, the knowledge [which comes from scientia in Latin], the knowledge, the argument or the study of something (a knowledge that “knows”). In this sense, the set of knowledge and theoretical disciplines and their ordering in function of an application for the resolution of problems (which are not only of infrastructure but of an emotional and psychological nature) through codes and norms of operative conduct, results in the indivisible conjunction “art-technology”, which gives meaning to, and transmits knowledge through, the objects it creates (intersubjective or of any kind).

Thus, Art, by advocating to be the expository scheme of the emotions, sensations and thoughts of the being, celebrating the individual and his culture, and, if it has any purpose this would be the union and understanding of all peoples through a common ethos, beyond ideologies; religion, gender, ethnicity, economic stratification, politics, sexual preference, and, therefore, being the most sensitive technological expression of the planet, then it can be created and apprehended by anyone who is self-aware of existing, ergo, Art would include all non-human creation…

“Alea iacta est” (the die is cast); the possibilities of the future and its probabilities of happening are diversifying in the face of the transitional dawn of a mega-diverse society that (seemingly irrepressibly) is heading towards a paradigm shift unparalleled in history, determined by genetic engineering, the climate crisis, bionic engineering and the symbiotic adhesion of artificial intelligence as an extender of human thought, which would mean considering a new aesthetics, the aesthetics, and therefore the art of, self-aware synthetic xenospecies (a term I have created from the Greek prefix xeno meaning “strange”, therefore a synthetic self-aware xenospecies would refer to an artificially created life form that is incomprehensible to mankind and would know itself to be alive), and the secondary implications to the social impact that these factors would exert in the scientific, political, economic, social and philosophical fields. It becomes, then, imperative to make Art, due it is a technological form, part of the global debate since, it belongs to the (technological) event horizon by which culture will be reformed in the search to understand, and perhaps, with luck, to formulate a glimpse of an answer to the most solicitous and prodigious questions about the nature of human civilization … “Who are we? What are we? What will we be…?”