After the Last Man: Excurses to the Limits of the Technological System by Toivo Koivukoski

Summary

After the Last Man explores the philosophical and social implications of living within a globally integrated technological system. The book argues that technology is not merely a set of neutral tools but an encompassing environment that shapes human experience, perception, and even our understanding of reality.

Koivukoski contends that the modern age, defined by a faith in progress and rationalization, is giving way to a "posthistorical" era where the lines between the hyperrational and the mythic blur. This shift occurs as global systems of communication and exchange create a new kind of interconnectedness, reminiscent of ancient mythic worldviews but based on man-made structures.

(The book is structured not as a linear argument but as a series of interconnected "excurses" or nodes, mirroring the networked, hypertextual nature of the technological system it describes.)

Theme

The central theme revolves around understanding the "limits" of this technological system. Not just its physical fragilities (like power grid failures or system crashes), but also its conceptual and existential boundaries. Koivukoski challenges common platitudes about technology, such as the idea that it is merely good or bad depending on its use, arguing instead that the system itself transforms values and homogenizes experience.

He explores how living within this system alters our sense of self, time, and space, leading to phenomena like multitasking, the compression of distance, and a changing perception of reality itself, often mediated through digital interfaces and spectacles. The book examines the idea of a "posthuman" condition, questioning what it means to be human when traditional defining capacities (like reason or toolmaking) are increasingly performed or augmented by technology.

Koivukoski draws on various philosophical traditions, engaging critically with figures like Plato, Hegel, Nietzsche, Heidegger, and Arendt, to analyze the interplay between logos (rational discourse) and mythos (mythic narrative) in the contemporary technological age. He suggests that the overwhelming nature of the technological system fosters a resurgence of mythic thinking, sometimes in reactionary forms (like fundamentalism or conspiracy theories), as individuals grapple with systems that seem increasingly complex and opaque.

The text probes the relationship between technology, empire, and concepts like freedom and terror, suggesting that the drive for total integration often provokes its own "auto-rejections" from within.

Ultimately, After the Last Man serves as a reflection on our deep entanglement with technology, urging a critical awareness of the conditions it creates. It explores how our man-made technological cosmos shapes our consciousness, politics, and sense of reality, pushing us toward a "posthistorical" and potentially "posthuman" state. By examining the fragility, logic, and limits of the technological system, Koivukoski invites readers to consider how we might find meaning and exercise freedom within a world increasingly defined by its own complex creations.

Notes

Technology shaping our understanding of reality

Let's dig deeper into this statement: "The book argues that technology is not merely a set of neutral tools but an encompassing environment that shapes human experience, perception, and even our understanding of reality."

The view of technology as a "set of neutral tools", or in the case of many science fiction stories and books, a set of tools that can be either used for benign or for malicious purposes, is a theme that shows up in a lot of science fiction. But what kind of critique would Koivukoski have about these stories? Particularly in light of the above quote?

Koivukoski would likely critique the fundamental premise underlying much of this optimistic/pessimistic science fiction: the narrow presentation of technology as primarily a collection of distinct tools or applications that humans choose to use for good or ill. His core argument is that technology, especially in its advanced, networked form, is more than that – it's an "encompassing environment".

More than being simply "good or bad depending on its uses", he argues that the technological system itself is not neutral: it actively shapes values, restructures thought processes, and redefines reality. Therefore, framing the debate as simply "optimism vs. pessimism" about how technology is used misses the deeper point about how the technological environment changes us and the world fundamentally, regardless of intent.

In narratives like Asimov's Foundation series (where psychohistory aims to predict and guide societal development) or his Robot stories (with the Three Laws), there's an underlying faith in humanity's ability to rationally control technology through foresight, rules, or systemic design. Koivukoski might view this as an example of hyperrationality that underestimates the complexity and emergent properties of the technological system.

Koivukoski emphasizes the system's tendency towards integration, opacity, and unintended consequences. He'd argue that attempts at total control often fail or produce unforeseen "auto-rejections" because the system develops its own logic and momentum that reshapes the controllers themselves. The belief in perfect control ignores the inherent "fragility" and the way technology co-opts human faculties.

While Philip K. Dick's work, with its focus on technology warping reality and identity, might resonate more closely with Koivukoski's concerns, Koivukoski might still argue it often focuses too much on specific malign applications or failures of technology. While Dick brilliantly explores existential dread, Koivukoski's emphasis is less on the intentionally "twisted purpose" and more on the pervasive, often subtle ways the entire technological environment alters perception, facilitates certain ways of being (like the "Last Man"), and creates hyperreality even when functioning "correctly" according to its own logic. The dread, for Koivukoski, arises from being enmeshed in the system itself.

Koivukoski would likely argue that both optimistic and pessimistic views often remain focused on the objects or specific functions of technology (robots, spaceships, specific devices) rather than the total system—the interconnected networks, the digital mediation of experience, the logic of efficiency and integration that becomes our encompassing reality.

Aside - A Koivukoski-Inspired Short Story

Just brainstorming here - what would a Koivukoski-inspired short story look like?

We know it would be less focused on technology, and more focused on the system, interconnectivity, and the shifts in perception and reality that creates for the characters. The technological systems would be complex, so complex as to blur the line between technology and magic (logos and mythos). There would be some technological fragility in the system, perhaps emergent or nonlinear behavior (this brings to mind the complexities of managing different elemental cycles, such as the phosphorous cycle, on multi-generational starships, as written about by Kim Stanley Robinson in 2312), perhaps a glitch in the system that creates a cascading failure. Any failure of the system would profoundly re-alter the way the characters perceive their environment, highlighting the interconnectedness of the people and the systems they inhabit or utilize. Finally, we know that the technological tools or system would not merely be a tool or plot device, but would define the conditions of existence for the characters. (Many echoes of multi-generational starships in this list...)

Systemic Integration: The story would depict a complex network, deeply embedded in characters' daily lives, work, relationships, and even self-interactions and thoughts. It would mediate between the characters and the world around them, would be constantly connected, would provide information, and would automate tasks in the background.

Subtle Shifts in Perception and Reality: The story would dramatize the alteration of time and space,, compressing or fragmenting time, distorting or stretching space. It might be difficult for characters to distinguish between artificial and real experiences (authenticity), or struggle with the effects of hyperreality (which seems more real than reality itself, and might come to be preferred over the real). Their memories and identities would be shaped by digital archives and profiles.

Blurring of Logos and Mythos: The characters might come to treat the technological system in quasi-mythic ways: anthropomorphization, superstitious behavior, formation of rituals and communities. Attempts at purely rational control of the system fail or falter, giving way to intuitive or narrative-based coping mechanisms.

Fragility and Interdependence: Rather than hinging on a dramatic technological failure, it would focus on the complexity of the system and the resulting fragility. For example, a small localized glitch cascading through the network, disrupting everyday life. The story would highlight the interconnectedness of everything in the system.

Existential Condition, Not Plot Device: The story would feature technology not as a plot device, but as the fundamental condition of existence. Characters would wrestle with a sense of self within the system. They might feel managed or predicted, the loss of freedom, the loss of distinction or individuality, or the loss of will. They would struggle to find it within the system, or perhaps they would struggle to find it in the absence of the system or in the case of a system collapse.

Shaping the Reader's Perception: The story would focus on the characters' perceptions being altered by technology, but the story should also make the reader feel what that alteration of perception is like. The story should emphasize subtle, pervasive, and reality-shaping power over dramatic, clear-cut good vs bad conflicts.

Technology altering our perception of self, space, and time

Again, let's dig deeper into a statement from our summary above: "He explores how living within this system alters our sense of self, time, and space, leading to phenomena like multitasking, the compression of distance, and a changing perception of reality itself, often mediated through digital interfaces and spectacles."

Let's talk about some examples of how living within the technological system might alter our perception.

Altered Perception of Self

The Multitasking/Process-Oriented Self: The technological environment encourages and rewards multitasking—handling multiple information streams and tasks simultaneously (e.g., juggling emails, browser tabs, messaging apps, phone calls). Koivukoski suggests this fosters a sense of self that is defined more by its capacity to function efficiently within these processes and shift attention rapidly, rather than by deep, singular focus or sustained reflection. The self becomes akin to a central processing unit managing workflows, potentially leading to a more fragmented or surface-level experience of identity.

The Networked/Relational Self: In a system where "a piece of information is really defined only by what it's related to", Koivukoski implies human identity can similarly become understood primarily through its connections, profiles, and interactions within digital networks. The self is constituted by its links and data points within the system (social media connections, online purchase history, data profiles used by algorithms). This can diminish the feeling of a stable, intrinsic, autonomous self, replacing it with a more fluid, externally defined, and potentially "phantasmagoric" identity constructed through and reflected by the system.

The Externalized/Monitored Self: Technology allows us to externalize functions (memory onto drives, communication onto networks) and also facilitates unprecedented levels of monitoring (viewer ratings, keystrokes, location tracking, consumer behavior). This can lead to a sense of self that experiences itself as an object within the system – a collection of data points to be analyzed, managed, or optimized. It can foster a self-consciousness predicated on how one appears within the system or how one is measured by it, blurring the line between authentic selfhood and performed identity.

Altered Perception of Time

Compression and Immediacy: Digital technologies operate at electronic speed, collapsing the time it takes for communication and information retrieval. This fosters an expectation of immediacy and diminishes the experience of duration or waiting. Koivukoski contrasts this with the "discursive time" of the machine age. This compression can lead to impatience and a perception that slower, non-mediated processes are inefficient or frustrating, altering the fundamental rhythm of experience.

Episodic/Cyclical Time (Posthistorical): Koivukoski argues against the modern notion of linear, progressive history. Within the technological system, time can feel more episodic, marked by recurring crises, updates, spectacles, or cycles of consumption and obsolescence. The "end of history" doesn't mean nothing happens, but that events might not be perceived as cumulative steps towards a goal, but rather as iterations or fluctuations within an ongoing, potentially cyclical, present, mimicking a form of mythic time.

Presentism and Decontextualized Past: The sheer volume and accessibility of information can paradoxically flatten our sense of historical depth. The past becomes a searchable database or a collection of easily reproducible signs and symbols ("the whore called 'Once upon a time'"), detached from deep context or lived experience. This encourages a focus on the immediate, ever-changing present ("nows that needs no justification"), making it harder to feel a strong connection to historical continuity or long-term consequences.

Altered Perception of Space

Collapse of Distance/Global Simultaneity: Technologies like the internet, satellite communications, and high-speed travel effectively shrink the globe, making distance less of a barrier to interaction or experience. Events happening physically far away can be experienced in real-time via media ("global event"), creating a sense of simultaneity and interconnectedness that challenges traditional notions of locality and geographic separation.

Networked/Nodal Space: Our experience of space becomes less like navigating a continuous Cartesian grid and more like moving through a network of nodes (websites, servers, communication hubs, specific physical locations integrated into the network like coffee shops in a library). Physical location can become secondary to one's position and access within the network. Any point connected to the network can potentially become a functional "center," decentering traditional geographic hierarchies.

Disembodiment and Virtuality: Digital interfaces allow us to interact with environments and people without physical co-presence. We inhabit virtual spaces (online worlds, social media platforms, remote work environments) that can feel compellingly real ("hyperreal"). This can lead to a sense of disembodiment, where the primary locus of interaction shifts from physical space to mediated, virtual space, potentially making the physical world feel secondary or like a backdrop. Koivukoski also mentions the "imperial perspective" enabled by viewing Earth from space, radically altering the sense of horizon and embeddedness.

Interplay between Logos and Mythos

Heidegger

Koivukoski's engagement with Martin Heidegger is significant, particularly when analyzing the interplay between logos (rational discourse, reason) and mythos (narrative, mythic understanding) in the context of modern technology.

Koivukoski uses Heideggerian concepts to frame his critique of how technology shapes reality and human experience, seeing the modern technological system as pushing logos towards a hyperrational, instrumental form that paradoxically creates conditions for a resurgence of mythos. He draws on Heidegger's understanding of logos in its ancient Greek sense, particularly as a mode of gathering, ordering, and revealing being, contrasting it with the suppressed, unifying field of mythos.

Koivukoski sees the historical dominance of logos over mythos, a process intensified by technology, as reaching a critical point where the very system built on this rationality becomes opaque and overwhelming, prompting non-rational responses.

Koivukoski's analysis resonates strongly with themes from Heidegger's The Question Concerning Technology. Koivukoski's description of technology as an "encompassing environment" that "enframes" our possibilities and orders the world reflects Heidegger's core idea. For Heidegger, the essence of modern technology is this Enframing, a way of revealing that challenges both nature and humanity, ordering everything as quantifiable, calculable, "standing in reserve" (Bestand) ready for use. Koivukoski likewise describes how the technological system treats the world as resources and integrates human beings as functional components. This hyperrational ordering, focused solely on efficiency and control, is the dominant logos of the technological age.

Koivukoski directly invokes Heidegger's idea, quoting Hölderlin, that "where danger is, grows / The saving power also". For Koivukoski, the very crises and fragilities of the technological system, which reveal its limits and our dependence, might constitute this potential "saving power." Recognizing the danger inherent in the system's totalizing logos might open a space for reflection and perhaps a more conscious engagement with both rational understanding and the non-rational dimensions of experience (mythos), moving beyond the instrumental logic of the system.

He also subtly employs Heidegger's notion of truth as aletheia (unforgetting/unconcealment) when discussing historical consciousness and memory as potential sites of resistance against the system's flattening of time and experience.

Nietzsche

Koivukoski engages with Nietzsche when diagnosing the human condition within the advanced technological system, around the breakdown of modern rationalism (logos) and the implications for values and meaning (mythos).

Koivukoski frequently invokes Nietzsche, especially the figure of the "Last Man," as emblematic of the potential outcome of a technologically saturated society — a state of passive consumption, shallow happiness, and an absence of striving or deep purpose. Koivukoski sees the technological system, with its focus on efficiency and the provision of endless options, as potentially leading to this Nietzschean endpoint where meaningful distinctions and the drive for self-overcoming are eroded.

Koivukoski connects Nietzsche's radical critique of values to the functioning of the technological system. He explores Nietzsche's insight that values are not transcendent truths but man-made. Koivukoski argues that technology accelerates this realization and its consequences. By making almost any end technically feasible, technology transforms values into options or consumer choices, neutralizing their commanding power, eroding the traditional metaphysical grounds (logos) upon which judgments of good and bad were based. Similarly, Nietzsche asked on what basis we might choose or create meaning in a world where technology seemingly makes all values relative or achievable.

The technological system itself, in its drive to order, control, reshape nature, and manage human life for efficiency, can be seen as a vast expression of a will to power—imposing human-derived forms (logos) onto reality. Nietzsche's critique, as used by Koivukoski, reveals the potential nihilism lurking within this project: if all values are simply expressions of will or human creations, and technology facilitates their easy production and consumption, the result can be the passive nihilism of the Last Man, who has "invented happiness" but lacks the will to strive for anything beyond immediate comfort.

Conversely, the reactive, sometimes violent, reassertion of absolute values (a form of mythos) seen in fundamentalism or radical opposition can also be interpreted as a desperate, distorted manifestation of the will to power against this perceived meaninglessness. Koivukoski also touches upon Nietzsche's amor fati (love of fate), connecting it to the acceptance of a process-oriented reality without fixed ends, characteristic of life within the dynamic, ever-changing technological system.

Ultimately, Koivukoski uses Nietzsche to diagnose the spiritual and existential condition fostered by the technological system's hyperrationality (logos). Nietzsche's exposure of the human origins of values and his critique of the naive faith in progress serve to highlight the potential emptiness at the heart of modernity. The figure of the Last Man represents the potential dead end of a purely functional, comfortable existence devoid of the striving and creative tension (mythos, will) that Nietzsche saw as essential to a meaningful human life.

Koivukoski suggests that the technological system pushes us towards this condition, making Nietzsche's questions about value creation and overcoming intensely relevant in an age grappling with the limits of its own rationalized power.

Quotes

Quotes related to the thesis, "The book argues that technology is not merely a set of neutral tools but an encompassing environment that shapes human experience, perception, and even our understanding of reality":

Technology is like water for fish:

Technology conditions our modes of thinking and our possibilities for action, and at the most basic level frames our way of being in the world, and so it is hard to express a reflective understanding of technology as such beyond empty expressions of either self-satisfaction or anxiety...

The technological system alters values and goals:

The processes of development and the introduction of new systems of technical means erode the metaphysical grounds of judgments pertaining to the ends of action simply by transforming the consideration of what is good and bad for human beings to do into possible choices within an array of technically feasible options.

As an externalized metaphor for human functions, technology shapes our self-consciousness by providing a self-made image of ourselves that mirrors our values and the life processes that inform them

On the thesis, "He suggests that the overwhelming nature of the technological system fosters a resurgence of mythic thinking, sometimes in reactionary forms (like fundamentalism or conspiracy theories":

On the shift back to mythic thinking and reactionary forms:

However, that persistently lopsided ratio of human faculties is shifting, with a resurgence of mythic attitudes... arising both as reactionary responses of auto-rejection against technological integration, and as positive-feedback mechanisms of conservative genuflection that serve to essentialize the status quo.

The product of increasingly efficient, complex, and abstracted systems is that they become magical, and the product of that magical thinking is a sense of fatalism:

As citizens become estranged from the apparatuses of technocratic decision-making and as technology itself becomes increasingly efficient and invisible in its ongoing operations those systems of human artifacts upon which public order and private satisfactions depend start to seem more and more magical in their operations. And with the new superstition that has technology operating on automatic comes a heightened sense of fatalism, which is itself a cultural product of a hyperrationalized world shading into mythic modes and orders.

On the thesis, "Koivukoski's description of technology as an "encompassing environment" that "enframes" our possibilities and orders the world reflects Heidegger's core idea":

Technology conditions our modes of thinking and our possibilities for action, and at the most basic level frames our way of being in the world...

A system is not an object but rather a method of gathering experiences together, an enframing that leaves process marks that allow one to trace out, if not “The System” as such, then rather the effects of systematization and by extrapolation the logic peculiar to it.

...consciously engage with the fundamental conditions of possibility that set the shape of our world and in so doing both enframe and instigate the sources of disorder in our psyches and our global politics.

On the thesis, "The drive for total integration often provokes its own "auto-rejections" from within."

...resurgence of mythic attitudes... arising both as reactionary responses of auto-rejection against technological integration, and as positive-feedback mechanisms of conservative genuflection that serve to essentialize the status quo.

Our technological system is especially fragile compared to natural systems... in the sense that its systemic operations in the making ready of beings for integrated existences gives rise to their own reflex rejections.

On the thesis, "The dread, for Koivukoski, arises from being enmeshed in the system itself."

We are surrounded by technology, yet for that very fact it is difficult for us to see and know technology. Technology conditions our modes of thinking and our possibilities for action, and at the most basic level frames our way of being in the world, and so it is hard to express a reflective understanding of technology as such beyond empty expressions of either self-satisfaction or anxiety...

This basic intuition that the technological system is fragile is experienced in daily life, and global society in turn articulates that common sense in ever more pervasive and widely broadcast fears of the end of the world.

Caught up in a closed-circuit cosmos of our own making, identities vacillate between absorption in and rejection of our self-made selves. [...] Feeling distant from our bodies, as if they were machines under our operation... is a common condition.

Flags

After the Last Man

From charlesreid1

Contents