Technium and Posthuman Becoming: A Critical Posthumanist Reading of Dan Brown’s Origin
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As human beings have entered the twenty-first century, they have evolved to become a constantly evolving, super-intelligent, and posthuman species in this techno-driven era. Contemporary human beings are not the same Homo sapiens, the early modern humans, who are believed to have evolved 2, 00,000 years ago in East Africa. Over the course of time, Homo sapiens have undergone several significant biological, lingual, and ontological adaptations to survive, populate, and control the world. So, as contemporary critical posthumanists claim, human beings have become post-human beings and are always in the process of ‘becoming’ or evolving. Also, critical posthumanists uphold that the becoming of the posthuman happens only in the interconnectedness or symbiosis of humans with non-humans. Dan Brown’s Origin deals with one such imaginable possibility of humans evolving further into posthuman beings because of their symbiotic relationship with technium. The novel prophecies or predicts the realistic as well as the imaginable possibility of the human species mixing or merging with technology into a complex, interconnected, interdependent species becoming posthuman beings in the near future. The objective of this research paper is to use critical posthumanism theory to read, analyze, and interpret Dan Brown’s Origin. The researcher highlights and analyses the fictional possibility of humans in their symbiosis, intra-action, and trans-corporeality with technium, i.e. engagement and fusion with the modern technologies that alter humans’ subjectivity and identity evolving to become posthuman beings through critical posthumanist reading of Dan Brown’s Origin.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.039 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".