In 2018, Bartlett graduate, Christine Wurth speculates a near future where haptic communication device, Neotouch becomes a standard communication tool that allows people to touch each other at any distance. This design fiction posed a critical question on future ethics concerning pervasive issue such as the loss of privacy when a device like Neotouch is brought to life. Like Charlie Brooker’s Black Mirror and Dave Eggers’ The Circle, this paranoia was developed based on the current societal obsession on mobile technology, wearable technology, internet and social media in which Byung Chul Han termed as the neoliberal psychopolitics technology (Han, 2016). Therefore, the paper hypothesised that Neotouch is another embodiment of neoliberal technology that will make thinking future ethics to be an undeniable conundrum as neoliberalism has the power to redefined ethics as an entity relative to self-interest. Therefore, I will discuss how neoliber-
alism changes the notion of ethics then argue on the reasons why thinking future ethics in the context of Neotouch; neoliberalism dominated reality is a narcissist’s dilemma in this paper.
The Dogma of Ethics
Firstly, what is ethics? In Glanville’s, A ship without a rudder suggested that goals are determined by a network of different objectives in light of the symbiotic relationship between man and the machine (Glanville, 1997). However, I argue that he/she behind the steer is not only an individual with his/her conscious mind but many that involved in fabricating his/her mind. This is because Peter L Berger theorised that our reality is socially constructed through socialisation apart from nature itself (Berger,1991). Therefore, it is not only the system that is the sum of all goals but the mind of “his/her” also embodied a set of constructed objectives by the others. The constructed objectives are also known as the total goals that allowed him/her to activate the system while the system. is the embodiment of the creators’ minds. Just like ethics is a set of moral principles that regulate people’s actions (Perez,2017). It is also commonly known as the code of conduct and the most primitive form of disciplinary technique that subjugate and dictate one’s action. It is an intersubjective entity devised by higher authorities like religious entities and ruling members that members of the society shared to define the distinction between good and evil until today.
Nevertheless, this intersubjective narrative is different from the law as it is moral guidance that guides individuals in moral reasoning, rituals to do good and to prevent themselves from performing the crime. Therefore, the goal and idea of one’s thought are not inherently molded by his/her personal goal, but decided by a network of constructed objectives determined by institutions and societal beliefs per se. However, the age of neoliberalism has augmented the latter definition of ethics due to the political emancipation of private entities from the government.
Neoliberalism and Psychopolitics
The decentralisation of power has pushed the sole responsibility of the government to ensure collective good to the private entities ergo, making them autonomous. It gave the autonomous entity the capacity to uphold the responsibility to self-govern and self-optimisation such as the ability to reason what is good and bad independently. Thus, The strong emphasis of “Self ” hitherto on Thatcher’s remarkable quote “No Such Thing As Society” until today’s burgeoning practice of entrepreneurship has shown that J.S Mill’s utilitarian practice also deeply rooted in a neoliberalism society. Given that “self ” nor “private” as an autonomous entity based on “Homo oeconomicus” is deemed to be responsible for pursuing a goal that based on decisions that give him/herself the best outcome. However, the best result relies on whether the autonomous entity has sufficient capacity even when it comes to obtaining the basic necessity. According to Gershon, autonomous being is an assemblage of assets that continually developed on his/her own will to meet a specific benchmark of capabilities for him/her to acquire something that is inherently good for his/her welfare (Gershon, 2011). For instance, one has to be not just an impeccable Swiss Army knife but also one that can be upgraded nor polished at any time. Hence, the reality of the society no longer subjugated by the normative values of collective but by the Laissez-faire system that has turned everyone into a walking capital. Besides, Thanem and Wallenberg also argued that those who cannot achieve the goal deemed morally weak because they failed to self-optimise (Thanem and Wallenberg,2015). Since the goal embodied the needs and desires of the individual, the capacity that he/she needs in exchange depends on the neoliberal agency, the facilitator of needs. It inevitably fueled individual with the desire to seek for the agency of improvement to survive in this reality. In that sense, capacity is an institutionalised universal unit of exchange while desire is the fuel that allows individuals to reach their goal nor making the right decision. Hence, More is more, more is good, more is better has placed society in the delirium of consumption for good.
Nick Srnicek and Alex Williams described that the perpetual need for advancement marks the importance of education, an immaterial construct that keeps one capable to survive under the hegemony of Neoliberalism(Srnicek and Williams, 2015). It meant there’s a need for an abundance of information, immaterial products for capacity building. Therefore, people devoted themselves to the products and services produced by tech companies like Facebook, Alphabet, Apple, and so forth for living assurance. This was because the products are designed to fulfill their desire for self-optimisation and self-improvement. Nevertheless, it embodied the provision of “Progression”, “Abundance” and “self-optimisation” in which is essential for the Neoliberal life. For example, Utilitarian tools like iPhone allow users to stay connected incessantly, Fitbit provides bio-data for users to optimise their body and an immaterial platform like Google’s search engine enabling users to access the world of knowledge instantaneously. Such a provision often defined as an extension, an upgrade to our capacity let it be our social status or obtaining new skills in which it is rationally good for the people in this living reality. Likewise, Barbara felt good as she no longer has to be the black sheep of the community after adopting Neotouch in Wurth’s design fiction (Wurth,2018). Besides, users who played LovePlus, a virtual relationship game, fell in love with the digital avatar, Rinko Kobayakawa because it offers fantasies that overcome the insecurity of a real relationship like breakups, etc.; One of the users thinks this is deemed good for their wellbeing (DarkNet, 2016). Also, In this situation what’s good or evil is determined by the fulfillment of desire and the benefit in which is a mere utilitarian basis. What benefits “me” is essentially good has turned “ethics” into a consumer product in which the society only legitimises it when it suits one’s needs and fulfillment.
Nonetheless, it is feared that the concern for the loss of privacy lamented in this Pseudo research techno-paranoia design fiction and much other technological satire will hardly be taken seriously by the people since Han stated that neoliberalism had turned humankind into selfish consumers (Han and Butler, 2016). For that reason, they only care about whether the products or services still benefit them. Likewise, People still use social media and smart devices extensively despite The Facebook Cambridge Analytica data scandal and Edward Snowden revealed that NSA’s, mass surveillance program, Prism can trace all kinds of online communication. Besides, Wurth stated in her Neotouch research that people are aware of exploitation, but they still submit. This is because all that the tech companies need to do is to fulfill the desire of the users for self-optimisation that based on Bertrand Russell’s theory of four desires that drives humankind such as acquisitiveness, rivalry, vanity, and love of power (Russell,1950). However, the loss of agency on privacy and autonomy were not wholly because of tech companies designing ways to make people submit to them for gaining the incentives. I argue that it is mostly due to the social norm shaped by the neoliberal political project. In neoliberalism, self-identity is part of the capital that keeps the person sustainable as it just the capacity. Identity is an immaterial product that is constructed by an immaterial construct like knowledge. According to Han, when there are more information and communication, it increased productivity and growth ergo this made us voluntarily self expose to the internet, product, and services offered by tech companies (Han and Butler, 2016).
Although self-exposure is the Achilles heels of privacy lost, it also strengthens the ego of oneself, and that gave people agency on their own identity. Nevertheless, the reliance on the immaterial provision is formed to maintain the capacity as in identity before tech companies intervene in our lives and turn against us. The thirst of capacity indeed fosters the devotion, but motivated by the competition for gaining basic needs to live thus, conceived the selfish consumer as mentioned above. In this condition, neoliberalism is a psychopolitical project theorised by Byung Chul Han because it manages to psyche everyone into conformity by taking control of their inner thought, hidden wish, desire, and needs (Han and Butler, 2016). The relationship between the user, the “agency of improvement” and neoliberalism resembles the connections between people, the church, and religion scripted in the Bible, the Book of Revelation. Consequently, submission gives tech agency to improve the life of an autonomous being at the same time loses its own autonomy whereas to forgo the submission might be ethically irresponsible for an autonomous being.
In short, neoliberalism raised the members of the society to be narcissists who only adore themselves like Narcissus from Greek mythology because it is the most ethical way to survive and behave in Neoliberalism and laissez-faire reality. Therefore, design fiction like Neotouch that strived to steer society to question about the future ethics would be like the battle between David and Goliath nor John’s Anti-Soma movement in Brave New World. It would be impossible to make an impact on society to prevent such a dystopian future happen nor perhaps setting a broader agenda such as legislating hard ethics. It is a priori because the future projected by Neotouch, an exaggeration based on the formidable implication of digital attachment since the early 21st century is a double-edged sword. The first reason behind this is the psychopolitics of neoliberalism may have embedded psychopolitics apparatus such as smart technology, social media, mobile technology, wearable devices, internet, and medium that provides the valuable upgrade to the autonomous being, or the narcissist. Second, the narcissist relies on the apparatus to maintain his/her identity to compete and survive in the laissez-faire reality as mentioned in the previous chapter. Thirdly, good ethics meant the narcissist has a moral responsibility for constantly upgrading his capacity. Therefore, this is an impasse situation even though academic research or real-world condition affirmed that the devotion is exploitation nor Naomi Klein starts ideological warfare on neoliberalism. The psychopolitics tool is not only a tool for the narcissist to resolve their identity issue but a natural extension to them ergo, needs are defined by the bio-state and the extension; The extension is like another inseparable organ to them as their self-constructed identity needed it to function. According to Ronningstam and Baskin-Sommers, the narcissist has the tenacity to pursue a goal focused on self-enhancement, and it is not possible to redirect them(Ronningstam and Baskin-Sommers, 2013). Hence, they will choose to conform especially to the popular media instead resign from the system nor seek ways to reform it even they are aware of the exploitation that may be harming the majority. Researchers claim this is due to their low empathy level to understand others whereas keeping their superiority is more critical (Cizek et el, 2008). However, some might give up part of the benefit provided by the system like Barbara gave up Neotouch because it is bringing her more harm than good, but she remains in the system such as using the technology that gave birth to Neotouch. Also, this situation is termed as the narcissist’s dilemma as we are well aware of the threat, we went against it but not the whole system because at the same time we realised that it is the system that defines us ergo we cannot lose everything. Even Christine Wurth stated in her research that people had accepted the reality that they need to exist online to be relevant in this contemporary society(Wurth,2018). Thus, this is the problem in thinking future ethics especially when it comes to finding a solution on rationalising it. All we know our society has overshadowed Kantian thinking with utilitarian ideology in justifying the act of morality. Maybe it is time to look back into Kant’s Deontology given that it has more control in regulating desire as Adam Curtis once stated that we are the proletariat of our desire.
Barile, N. (2017) ‘Branding, Selfbranding, Making’:, in Briziarelli, M. and Armano, E. (eds) The
Spectacle 2.0. University of Westminster Press (Reading Debord in the Context of Digital Capitalism),
pp. 151–166. Available at:
Belletto, S. (2009). Rescuing Interpretation with Mark Danielewski: The Genre of Scholarship in House
of Leaves. Genre, 42(3-4), pp.99-117.
Berliner, T. (2017). Hollywood Aesthetic. Oxford Scholarship Online.
Berardi, F. (2017). Futurability : The Age of Impotence and Horizon of Possibility. London: Verso.
Biancotti, D. (2012). The Weirdness in House of Leaves | Weird Fiction Review. [online] Weird Fiction
Review. Available at: [Accessed
19 Jul. 2019].
Bishop, B. (2014). Inside the greatest sci-fi film never made. [online] The Verge. Available at: https://
[Accessed 18 Jul. 2019].
Bosch, T. (2012). Sci-Fi Writer Bruce Sterling Explains the Intriguing New Concept of Design Fiction.
[online] Slate Magazine. Available at:
fictions.html [Accessed 21 Jul. 2019].
Chaslot, G. (2019). The Toxic Potential of YouTube’s Feedback Loop. [online] WIRED. Available at:
X6VYlgaWWZaHc [Accessed 20 Jul. 2019].
Chaney, A., Stewart, B. and Engelhardt, B. (2018). How algorithmic confounding in recommendation
systems increases homogeneity and decreases utility. Proceedings of the 12th ACM Conference on
Recommender Systems - RecSys ’18.
Culp, A. (2016). Dark Deleuze. Minneapolis (Minn.): University of Minnesota press.
Crawford, A. (2000). Mark Z. Danielewski: House of Leads - 21C Magazine. [online] 21cmagazine.com.
Available at: [Accessed 19
Carr, Nicholas G. The Shallows : What the Internet Is Doing to Our Brains / Nicholas Carr. New York ;
London: W.W. Norton, 2011. Print.
Chandler, D. (1997) An Introduction to Genre Theory.
Cherry, K. (2019). What Is Cognitive Dissonance?. [online] Verywell Mind. Available at: https://
[Accessed 19 Jul. 2019].
Cherry, K. (2019). What Role Do Schemas Play in the Learning Process?. [online] Verywell Mind.
Available at: [Accessed 10 Sep. 2019].
Clark, J. (2015). Did Mark Z. Danielewski Just Reinvent the Novel?. [online] Literary Hub. Available at:
[Accessed 19 Jul. 2019].
Easterling, K. (2019). Medium Design. 3 June, The Bartlett School of Architecture, London.
Farnam Street. (n.d.). How Filter Bubbles Distort Reality: Everything You Need to Know. [online]
Available at: [Accessed 2 Sep. 2019].
Farley, C.J. 2009, Culture -- Authors: A (Strange) Tale of Two Cities --- In his new novel, China Mieville
aims to connect fantasy to the real world, Eastern edition edn, New York, N.Y.
Fiske, J. and Jenkins, H. (2011). Introduction to communication studies. London [England]: Routledge.
Freedman, C. (2013). From Genre to Political Economy: Miéville’s The City & The City and
Uneven Development. CR: The New Centennial Review, 13(2), pp.13-30.
Fuchs, C. (2018) ‘Propaganda 2.0’:, in Pedro-Carañana, J., Broudy, D., and Klaehn, J. (eds) THE
PROPAGANDA MODEL TODAY. University of Westminster Press (Filtering Perception and
Awareness), pp. 71–92. Available at:
Gibbons, A., 2012. Multimodality, cognition, and experimental literature / Alison Gibbons., New York:
Gordon, J. (2003). Joan Gordon -- Reveling in Genre: An Interview with China Mieville. [online]
Depauw.edu. Available at: [Accessed 17
Gerber, B. (2018). Dystopia For Sale: How a Commercialized Genre Lost its Teeth. [online] Literary Hub.
Available at: [Accessed 7
Hanlon, M. (2014). Has progress in science and technology come to a halt? – Michael Hanlon | Aeon
Essays. [online] Aeon. Available at:
to-a-halt [Accessed 30 Jul. 2019].
Hao, K. (2019). DeepMind is asking how AI helped turn the internet into an echo chamber. [online] MIT
Technology Review. Available at:
google-helped-turn-the-internet-into-an-echo-chamber/ [Accessed 1 Sep. 2019].
Hauptmann, D., Neidich, W., & Angelidakis, A. (2010). Cognitive architecture: from bio-politics to noo-
politics ; architecture & mind in the age of communication and information. Rotterdam, 010 Publishers.
Hollinger, V. (2006) ‘Stories about the Future: From Patterns of Expectation to Pattern Recognition’,
Science Fiction Studies. SF-TH Inc, 33(3), pp. 452–472. Available at:
Herman, E. and Chomsky, N. (1988). Manufacturing Consent. Pantheon Books.
Gatehouse, G. (2019). The confusion around Russian ‘meddling’ means they’re already winning | Gabriel
Gatehouse. [online] the Guardian. Available at:
25/russian-meddling-vladimir-putin-vladislav-surkov [Accessed 14 Sep. 2019].
Koltko-Rivera, M. (2004). The Psychology of Worldviews. Review of General Psychology, 8(1), pp.3-58.
Kolbert, E. (2017). Why Facts Don’t Change Our Minds. [online] The New Yorker. Available at: https://
[Accessed 31 Jul. 2019].
KUKKONEN, K. (2013) Contemporary Comics Storytelling. University of Nebraska Press. doi: 10.2307/
Knox, S. (2010). Why Effective Word-of-Mouth Disrupts Schemas. [online] Adage.com. Available at:
[Accessed 10 Sep. 2019].
In The Mouth of Madness:Who Writes Reality? (2019)Youtube video, added by Real Dimensional
Pictures. [Online]. Available at : [Accessed 27 Jul.
Lazzarato, M. et al.(1996) ‘Immaterial Labor’, in Virno, P. and Hardt, M. (eds) Radical Thought in Italy.
NED-New edition. University of Minnesota Press (A Potential Politics), pp. 133–148. Available at: http://
Levitin, D. (2017). Weaponized Lies: how to think critically in the post-truth era. 1st ed. United Kingdom:
Lovink, G. (2016). On the Social Media Ideology - Journal #75 September 2016 - e-flux. [online] E-
flux.com. Available at:
[Accessed 20 Jul. 2019].
Martin, A. (2013). The web's 'echo chamber' leaves us none the wiser. [online] Wired.co.uk. Available at:
[Accessed 1 Sep. 2019].
Maughan, T. (2014). Jodorowsky’s ‘Dune’: the most important science fiction movie never made. [online]
Medium. Available at:
science-fiction-movie-never-made-dc543bbe79ec [Accessed 18 Jul. 2019].
Mieville, C. (2009). 12. AFTERWORD - Cognition as Ideology - A Dialetic of Sci-Fi Theory, By China
Mieville | Ideologies | Science Fiction. [online] Scribd. Available at:
[Accessed 18 Jul. 2019].
Miller, C. (1984). Genre as social action. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 70(2), pp.151-167.
Nguyen, C. (2018). Why it’s as hard to escape an echo chamber as it is to flee a cult – C Thi Nguyen |
Aeon Essays. [online] Aeon. Available at:
chamber-as-it-is-to-flee-a-cult [Accessed 21 Aug. 2019].
O'Shea, L. (2019). Future Histories. 1st ed. London: Verso Books.
Özdemir, V., 2018. The Dark Side of the Moon: The Internet of Things, Industry 4.0, and The Quantified
Planet. OMICS: A Journal of Integrative Biology, 22(10), pp.637–641.
Pariser, E. and Heyborne, K. (2011). The filter bubble. [Old Saybrook, Ct.]: Tantor Media, Inc.
Planosophy. (2014). Part I: Mass Media vs The Media of The Masses.. [online] Available at: https://
planosophy.wordpress.com/2014/09/25/part-i-debord-social-media/ [Accessed 2 Aug. 2019].
Pomerantsev, P. (2017). Nothing is true and everything is possible. 1st ed. London: Faber & Faber.
Rahwan, I., Krasnoshtan, D., Shariff, A. and Bonnefon, J. (2014). Analytical reasoning task reveals limits
of social learning in networks. Journal of The Royal Society Interface, 11(93), pp.20131211-20131211.
Sadagopan, S. (2019). Feedback loops and echo chambers: How algorithms amplify viewpoints. [online]
The Conversation. Available at:
algorithms-amplify-viewpoints-107935 [Accessed 1 Sep. 2019].
Schmeink, L. 2014, "On the Look-Out for a New Urban Uncanny: An Interview with China Miéville",
Extrapolation., vol. 55, no. 1, pp. 25-32.
Schmidt, S.J., 1987. Towards a constructivist theory of media genre. Poetics, 16(5), pp.371–395.
Seel, N. (2012). Schema Development. Encyclopedia of the Sciences of Learning, pp.2936-2939.
Seeck, H. and Rantanen, T. (2014). Media events, spectacles and risky globalization: a critical review and
possible avenues for future research. Media, Culture & Society, 37(2), pp.163-179.
Shaviro, S. (2016). Discognition. Repeater Books.
Sterling, B. (2014). Design Fiction: “Speculative Everything” by Dunne & Raby. [online] WIRED.
[Accessed 21 Jul. 2019].
STORR, W. (2019). SCIENCE OF STORYTELLING. [S.l.]: HARRY N ABRAMS.
Stokel-Walker, C. (2019). The Augmented Human - How technology began to merge with the body - and
where we go next. [online] SPACE10. Available at:
[Accessed 27 Aug. 2019].
Silverblatt, A. (2007). Genre studies in mass media.
Silverblatt, A. (2004). Media as Social Institution. American Behavioral Scientist, 48(1), pp.35-41.
Techopedia.com. (2019). What is an Echo Chamber? - Definition from Techopedia. [online] Available at:
[Accessed 21 Aug. 2019].
The Economist. (2015). Digital Taylorism. [online] Available at:
2015/09/10/digital-taylorism [Accessed 3 Sep. 2019].
The Economist. (2018). How to tame the tech titans. [online] Available at:
leaders/2018/01/18/how-to-tame-the-tech-titans [Accessed 31 Jul. 2019].
Thwaites et al., 2002. Introducing cultural and media studies : a semiotic approach / Tony Thwaites,
Lloyd Davis, Warwick Mules., Basingstoke: Palgrave.
Vaccari, C. & Vergeer, M., 2013. From echo chamber to persuasive device? Rethinking the role of the
Internet in campaigns. New Media & Society, 15(1), pp.109–127.
Williams, R. (2018). Fighting “Fake News” in an Age of Digital Disorientation. Critical Media Literacy
and Fake News in Post-Truth America, 2(https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004365360_005).