Inhabiting the deep technological spheres of everyday life
“Siegfried Zielinski has pointed out that one important fallacy to overcome is to view the course of technological development as ‘progress’, or to consider our current state of technological sophistication as the best possible and necessary outcome of a predictable historical trajectory. In his ‘Variantology’ project Zielinski makes a radical break with any idea of technological progress or determinism [2]. The Variantological approach emphasises that at any point technological development (and human development along with it) is contingent (it can go anywhere). Variantology does not look for ‘master media’ or ‘imperative vanishing points’. Instead it seeks out the moments of greatest possible diversity and individual variation. It operates in carefully chosen periods of particularly intensive and necessary work on the media,# across different cultural and physical geographies – exploring the ‘deep time relationships of the arts, sciences and technologies’.

Finally, an exploration of inhabitable technological ecologies needs to take into account the phantasmatic dimension of technological apparatuses and systems. Such a more psychographic understanding of the depth of technology aims to uncover hidden, or not immediately visible or discernible psychological layers attached to the technological apparatuses – perhaps we might refer to this as a ‘technological unconscious’ – that underpin human experience and our subjective ties with technological environments. It considers technology not only as an extension of the body but also as an extension of our deepest desires. It explores the void between the ‘real’ and that what is mediated by systems of language, media, and technology. It acknowledges the existence of a ‘third body’ (Klaus Theweleit) [3] that inserts itself between us and the (technological) objects. This third body only emerges in our interaction with these objects, but it is neither held by us nor by the objects alone.”
Concept developed by Eric Kluitenberg.

This reminds me of Burroughs and Gysin – The Third Mind. An exploration of cut up techniques utilising found texts to create new material. During this process they claimed that a “third personality” emerged from the resulting texts that was distinct from that of either Burroughs or Gysin.