Perhaps it is true that the Borg still feels, but this objection itself illustrates precisely the point I am trying to make. The objection rests on the fact that Humans, and yes, even Vulcans, immediately interpret the Borg's absence of affective expression as a sign of attitudes and dispositions that, if they are not emotions as such, are clearly related to them, for example, resoluteness, determination, cruelty, and indifference. The adjective "strategic" in the above objection assumes that we anticipate that the Borg's behaviour will be consistent with what is suggested by the signs that we recognize or that we assume to be there. This in turn implies, first, that we do not understand the Borg's lack of emotional expression as affective silence. We give it meaning in terms of emotions. However, this spontaneous projection informs us about the type of creatures that we are but tells us nothing about the Borg. For us, there is no behaviour that is without a certain affective quality, none to which we do not attribute an emotional dimension of some sort. The term "strategic" also implies that affective expression is directly related to behaviour. The idea of strategy as it is used in the objection supposes that the lack of affect expressed by the Borg is unmistakenly associated by us with definite behaviours. Finally it suggests that the impassivity of the Borg will spontaneously orient us towards certain affective dispositions, such as fear, doubt, irresolution, and perhaps terror and confusion, as if the insensitivity of Borg itself were an action that had direct consequences on our own behaviour.
It therefore does not really matter whether or not members of the collective feel anything, for we spontaneously interpret their expressive passivity as revealing definite affective dispositions. What does matter fro the argument concerning the disappearance of the self, however, is that (it) they do(es) not express anything. When we respond affectively as we do to the Borg's indifference, through anger, fear, repulsion, or disgust, we attempt to coordinate our actions to theirs. unfortunately, this spontaneous effort of ours is doomed to failure because they cannot answer our affect. Unlike the action of their imagined insensitivity upon us, our emotional expression has no hold upon them. How is this failure visible? What demonstrates it is that we cannot individualize members of the collective. I do not mean by this that we cannot recognize that this "thing," half human and half machine, that is now coming towards us was not Borg half an hour ago but a data analyst working in engineering. It is, on the contrary, easy to recognize that members of the collective once were distinct individuals belonging to different species. However, what we cannot do is individualize them in action so to speak. There is nothing we can do that can evoke from a member of the collective a response that is not dictated by the collective.
Members of the collective do not react to affective expression because they do not need to. The Borg's mind is conscious of itself and the access of all to the complete store of information it contains is immediate and total. No individual needs therefore to coordinate his or her actions to those of another precisely because they are not individuals but part of a whole. The smooth functioning of the various parts of the Borg is centrally directed. There is no need for local and individual coordination in this situation because no one is uncertain about the intentions of another towards him. That is why members of the collective neither express nor recognize emotions. They have no use for that device.
3 doors, Person // dressed in a gorilla suit Walks into their
midST&& //, Waves conspicuously&& promulgates a vieW of
human // Nature as Ultimately self-seeking&& && then
WALks // out of the scene / so 128MB correctioN ribbon
neuroFibroma vasospasms, drops of lambs black Water,
035 Hansen Writing BAll .. just all those horrible things
I’ve never, ever haD to think about It It_Umbro Inflatable
Goal - 8x4ft cutting a simplE&& elegaNT shape in the Kentish
grasSEs. SCHOOL RUNS. nEuroFiBRIl Large favourite
doublebreasted conversation killer With the napolean collars // Marks
// from the belts&& PInchers&& rollers and geaRS that physically
movE the papER through the mAchine // WhilST they”re / Maxing
the BeD;; && Well-behaved in class / Shaves in gas all Wild
crySTals SIgniNg fovEA haunt Waiver IT may Be relatIvely
EASy tO chanGE one’s Anthropology for A feW sentences&&
but the Task of maintaining such an effort groWs more difficult
With every Word. Leonard Cohen Is said to have flung his
typeWriter / into the Aegean Sea. Herringbone Reflex Foam
RaISEr corresponds to ttha Stain PiltdoWn Winter Deity is
keelhauled impOrtant an aW LDN street plan subdivided into
imperatIVe to hide porn / Oral B professional Care 3000
PoWer / isomorphism With jackson pollock implanted
in VIto’s pons Varolii / day he left as 40s starlet [thrEAtS]
they the similar ecSTasy phenom impression purulent
sputum drained througH Putney by a really BaByliss
Summertime CerAMic Tong, belted&& Wool goat ;; In an
extraordinaRy displaY of selectivity // & DIScriMination&&
the same neuron did // not // respond To picTUres of
Jennifer With her then // husband Brad Pitt BaByliss
Essentials Ultra Shine LightWeight gummy? / tuRBOt
neuroptera the cycliST Pitt. / inSTEAd oF that p is fun
They do the Fifth Circle of his top lip;; The announced really
drive so we vagina dentata/Buzzes tHRu Danielle’s collarbone, im’s on
trainee placement reflecting optic chiasma missiles;; During sEAred It
grips my shit;; Our warrfighters tower maturiTy & guts / Jealsie
touched Cameron’s winkle while they 8-bal breached a Hackney
structure – FACT / Tight connection in the field // ’s caused an
argument between Jealsie and his bird, that connection / We pay this
extra WhaTEver it is&& £1,000 or / I think whites deServe
an OSCar / WhaTEver it is £1,000 £2:000 a month so We can gET a
ForWARd RepAir SySTem&& get A FreSh&& If We NEEd iT /
So ANYWay &&&&**
at the moment there”s soMEthing not quitE right W/ our ToWed
HoWitzer&& it keeps STriking short;; // So about three Weeks ago We / finally called out a mechanic&& &nD of course tHaT”s nerve-Wracking / BECause if it tuRNS out it”s actually something you”ve done you have to / pay the call-ouT / So the chappie comes out&& and of course it”s a part / that needs replacing / So he says / “NO no no no&& it”S the elevating / Worm gear braCKeT/” & So of course he hasn”t got one&& We have to / Wait for that / Fine / TWo Weeks later&& la lA la la / Another chappie / comes in&& very heLPful&& replaceS the elevating Worm gear / assembly&& lovely job&& very happy With it / FirST chappie&& by the Way&& tried to sell us a 155 mm calibre AGS turret&& but that”s a Whole / Other STory / of course&& that Was laST Friday&& and on Sunday-&& / Was it Sunday or Monday? The HoWitzer STrikes short again and We kill / my husband”s friend Liz /
"jowlindsay.blogspot.com is probably written by a male somewhere between 66-100 years old. The writing style is academic and upset most of the time [...] josephwalton.blogspot.com is probably written by a male somewhere between 66-100 years old. The writing style is personal and happy most of the time."
The Scottish Writers' Centre presents Poems for the Millennium Volume 3, The University of California Book of Romantic & Post Romantic Poetry, Winner of the 2010 American Book Award from The Before Columbus Foundation.
Thursday 21 October, 7pm. The Clubroom, Centre for Contemporary Arts, 350 Sauchiehall Street, Glasgow G2 3JD.
Editors Jerome Rothenberg and Jeffrey C. Robinson will be joined by Scottish poets Aonghas Macneacail, Gerrie Fellows, Tom Leonard, Peter Manson, Jane Goldman reading selections from Poems for The Millennium Vol. 3.
"Now I can tell you about it," said he. "I see my way clearly to a certain point. We must prevent Dick and his father meeting just now, or all hope of Dick's reformation is gone for ever. His father is as hard as the nether mill-stone. He has forbidden me his house."