xix. In this respect, Davies' environments help demonstrate Irigaray s adherence to the technophobia constitutive of Western philosophy. For a critique of Irigaray along these lines, see Weiss, Chapter 6. The important question to pose here is whether this technophobia is necessary and, given the resonances of our analysis in Chapter 1 with Irigaray’ s privileging of tactility as primordial, whether there is reason to believe that it is not. The task then would be to specify what a technics of tactile indifferentiation, as this is thought out of the maternal, might look like.
xx. See also Caillois' footnote where he likens this instinct to the Freud- ian death drive (“Mimicry and Legendary Psychasthenia," 32, note 44).
xxi. For a critique of this technophobia in Heidegger, see Mark Hansen, Embodying Technesis: Technology Beyond Writing, Chapter 4, and Bernard Stiegler, Technics and Time, volume 1: The Fault of Epimetheus, Part II.
xxii. Caillois is here citing Minkowski, “Le temps vécu."
第三章
i.关于这一点，特别参见Poster书中的第6章“Nations,Identities, and Global Technologies"
ii.;丽莎·中村(LisaNakamura)在她对聊天室文化习俗的揭露(《网络空间中的种族:互联网上的同一性旅游和种族传递》)中审视了种族的“抹黑”。这种批评是文集《网络空间中的种族》(Race in Cyberspace)的灵感来源。B.科尔科、L.中村和G.罗德曼(纽约:劳特利奇出版社，2000)。尤其是中村、詹妮弗·冈萨雷斯和贝丝·科尔科的文章。
iv.参见丽莎·中村对互联网广告的分析(“Where Do You Want toGoToday?”)控制论旅游、互联网和跨国”，见《赛博空间的种族》，21-22页)。
v.实际上，这意味着在该媒介或特定在线社区中管理角色可信度的惯例:
Notes
271