Calochortus plummerae: Theorizing Anthropology vis-a-vis Computing

To speculate about theorizing anthropology vis-a-vis computing, I'd like first to suggest that human bodyminds are like computers, that is, we're input / output bodymind systems that have sex {sperm in vagina is input} and have babies {which is output}, eat (input) and defecate (output), can read music (input) and play musical instruments (output), can study medicine, for example, with course readings, etc., (inputs), giving rise, after mental processing, to medical interventions, diagnoses, prescription-writing (outputs), design of clinical studies, etc., as well as hear/read a very wide range of ideas and speak about them, processing them neurally and symbolically.



I'd like then to explore the idea that human communication - primarily involving symbolization - is like networking computers sharing software {there are 3000-8000 languages}, with meme-influenced subcultures shaping culturally relative understandings.

But, John Money's "Concepts of Determinism" - pairbondage, troopbondage, abidance, ycleptance, foredoomance (Money 1988: 116-118) - are transcultural, transhistorical, and universal, and therefore fascinating to articulate with the culturally relative processes (such as language) above.



I'd then like to suggest that evolutionary biology~nature-the world creates human computers {input output systems}.

Culture is common software which develops.

And people learn, and can theorize anthropology anew.