This blog post is Part 3 in a running blog theme where I
use theories of cultural competency in
healthcare to investigate the development of techno-human identities. The purpose here is to
explore how concepts of cultural competency can help inform our understanding
of how technology interacts with identity and self-concept. These posts operate as a forum to
wrestle with these ideas in an effort to gain deeper understandings of
techno-human experiences. Also, it is good fun. Click here for Part 1 and 2.
In their text, Multicultural Health,
Ritter & Hoffman explored how using multicultural (or intercultural) approaches to healthcare might
positively impact life outcomes, disease/illness rates, and promote greater
social equity.
A desire to better understand the
nuances of different cultures lies at the heart of this discussion. Culture is
dynamic and fluid. Identities are multiple, fractured, and complex. It can be argued that culture affects/interacts/informs our perceptions of health and illness, beliefs
about why/how illness occurs, health behaviors, how symptoms are described and
how concerns are expressed, and how treatment is pursued and adhered. We proceed
here upon the assumption that culture is learned, changes over time, and is
passed from generation to generation; is complex, and many subcultures exist
within a dominant culture; and a person may belong to numerous
subcultures.
These statements become very interesting when we substitute
the word culture with technology.
We proceed here upon the assumption that technology is learned, changes over
time, and is passed from generation to generation; is complex, and many techno-subcultures exist within a
dominant culture; and a given person may belong to numerous techno-subcultures (or have layered
techno-identities).
The goals/attributes of a multicultural
approach to health care include purposeful, directed actions:
- To provide health services in a culturally sensitive, knowledgeable, and nonjudgmental manner
- To challenge one’s own cultural assumptions and ask critical questions
- To integrate different approaches to care
- To recognize the culture of the recipient while providing care in accordance with the legal/ethical norms and the medically sound practices of the practitioner’s medical system (this last is a key point)
Let’s try it again; this time we substitute the word health or care with technology.
- To provide technology services in a culturally sensitive, knowledgeable, and nonjudgmental manner
- To challenge one’s own technological assumptions and ask critical questions
- To integrate different approaches to technology
- To recognize the culture (technology) of the recipient while providing technology in accordance with the legal/ethical norms and the scientifically sound practices of the practitioner’s technology system(s)
Cultural adaptation (or acculturation) is a critical component in understanding multicultural
health. Summarized, cultural adaptation here is the degree to which a
person has adapted to the dominant culture while retaining traditional
practices; occurs on a spectrum between immersion in the dominant culture and
immersion in a native culture; and where high levels of acculturation can have
positive health benefits, yet some health-positive aspects of traditional
culture (and by extension identitiy) may also be lost in the process.
Four main quadrants comprise this construction:
- Assimilated: move away from culture of origin immersing into dominant society
- Integrated: immersion in both ethnic and dominant society
- Marginal: considered most difficult, not accepted (integrated) by culture of origin or dominant society
- Separated: withdraws from dominant society and is immersed in ethnic society
In multicultural health research, integrated is often considered the most healthy adaptation style.
For kicks, these principles can be applied to techno-human/human-techno
integration on a spectrum of "full" AI to “raw” human in either direction.
- Assimilated: move away from culture of origin immersing into “other” society
- Integrated: immersion in both human and robotic societies
- Marginal: considered most difficult, not accepted by culture of origin or “other” society
- Separated: withdraw from dominant society and immersed in human only or robotic only society
This is the fun bit. Create your own.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.