I am interested in how we define the human subject with either a legal or scientific framework.
Contemporary art debate, pertaining to the human subject, tends to lean towards augmentation. Many people long to exceed the limits of human physicality through synthetic or medical enhancement. While I can see the advantages this brings, it encourages us to overlook what we already possess – the hidden, astonishing qualities contained within unadulterated bodies. Negating the natural poetics, promotes a sense that we are somehow not quite enough. I find this stance counter-intuitive as it only moves us further away from biological and conscious states that we still hardly understand. My opinion is that we need to re-assert the obvious, yet seemingly forgotten reality that we are in fact animals, albeit highly sophisticated ones.
Defining the human as an animal places this project within wider philosophical such as alterity, our relationship to other species, perceived hierarchies, matters of personhood and our ongoing relationship with the natural environment. Repositioning the human subject is also vitally important in terms of how we understand our own behaviours, needs and desires.
The instigator of science-art collaborations and public engagement initiatives and have established working relationships within medicine, artificial intelligence, neurology and zoology.