focus pair: Mechanomorphism | Anthropomorphism

One could engage in the following over-simplifying, dichotomizing and outrageous exercise:

if we were to imagine that our species succeeded in collectively transforming humanity, that is, succeeding in how the species perceives its own ontological being as one of:

“…we are best defined and relatable through mechanomorphic metaphors, mechanomorphic self-images, mechanomorphic relations and datafying processes,”

At that imaginary point, any anthropomorphism (as engine for designs or visionary aims) within technologies ( and that with a unique attention to those associated with the field of “AI”) might be imagined to be(come) empowered, enabled or “easier” to be accomplished with mechanomorphized “humans.”

In such imagination, the mechanomorphized human, with its flesh turned powerless and stale, and its frantic fear of frailty, surrenders.

It could be imagined being “easy,” & this since the technology (designer) would “simply” have to mimic the (human as) technology itself: machine copies machine to become machine.

Luckily this is an absurd imagination as much as Guernica is forgettable as “merely” cubistic surrealism.