Between Self-Tracking and Alternative Medicine: Biomimetic Imaginary in Contemporary Biohacking

Context and Objectives

The article examines biohacking as a distinct mode of contemporary techno-asceticism that merges principles from data-driven self-tracking cultures (such as the Quantified Self movement) with practices and ideologies from alternative health and complementary medicine. Lindfors aims to fill a gap in current anthropological and social studies by unpacking the underlying “biomimetic imaginary” that informs biohacking practices.

Key Themes and Concepts

1. Cybernetic Lineage and Contemporary Biohacking

• Historical Roots and Cybernetic Ideals:

The article contextualizes biohacking within a lineage of cybernetic thought. It highlights how early cybernetics, with its emphasis on control, feedback loops, and adaptive systems, set the stage for a modern interpretation where the body is viewed as a “biocomputer” that can be modified and optimized.

• Entrepreneurial Self-Experimentation:

Biohacking is presented as an enterprise driven by a hacker mentality—a performative engagement with one’s biology through self-experimentation that transforms personal data (or “small data”) into insights when combined with the broader community’s “big data.”

2. Biomimetic Imaginary

• Nature as a Model and Benchmark:

Central to the article is the idea that biohacking involves a biomimetic imaginary. Biohackers seek to align their interventions with natural principles. They hold the belief that technology should replicate or enhance the efficiency, resilience, and healing capacities found in nature. This ideal places “natural” bodily processes and the human sensorium at the core, often regarding technological enhancement as secondary.

• Dual Orientation Toward Self-Tracking and CAM:

Lindfors argues that while biohacking retains ties to the Quantified Self’s data-centric methods, it simultaneously draws from alternative health practices—ranging from light and heat therapies to plant medicines and yogic practices. This fusion challenges conventional separations between technology, medicine, and the body, thereby promoting a unique ethos of self-use.

3. Cultural and Ideological Underpinnings

• Techno-Naturalist Ethos:

The article discusses how biohacking generates a discourse that not only emphasizes measurement and quantification but also valorizes a return to a “natural” state. This duality often involves a hierarchical positioning in which the body’s innate capacities and the wisdom of natural processes are seen as paramount.

• Critique of Modernity and Capitalist Influences:

Lindfors examines the broader sociocultural and political context, noting that biohacking is influenced by consumerism, neoliberal values, and an increasing skepticism toward established scientific and medical expertise. The work suggests that while biohacking may empower individuals to explore and optimize their biology, it also risks reinforcing individualistic and market-driven approaches to health.

4. Practical Manifestations and Biohacker Summits

• Summit Presentations as Ethos-Curators:

The study draws on extensive material from Biohacker Summit presentations to illustrate how key figures in the community articulate their vision. The summits serve as platforms where ideas and products are showcased, emphasizing the balance between scientific legitimacy and alternative, sensorial practices.

• Integration of Self-Tracking and Embodied Practices:

Presentations and discussions at these events reflect an agenda that bridges data-driven self-tracking with embodied experiences. Technologies and gadgets are presented alongside natural remedies, forming a narrative where the human sensorium is both measured and celebrated as the basis for authentic well-being.

5. Implications and Future Directions

• Re-Naturalization of Technology:

By positioning technology as subordinate to nature, biohacking redefines the relationship between the human body and technological interventions. This approach seeks to humanize technological advancements by emphasizing intuition, sensory experience, and embodied knowledge.

• Critical Inquiry and Further Research:

The article calls for deeper investigation into the political, ethical, and cultural implications of biohacking. It suggests that future research should examine how biohacking practices intersect with broader debates in posthumanism, transhumanism, and alternative medicine, and how these interactions influence notions of bodily self-use and personal autonomy.

Conclusion

Lindfors argues that contemporary biohacking represents a convergence of self-tracking cultures and alternative medicine, characterized by a dualistic yet integrated biomimetic imaginary. It champions the idea that natural processes and the human sensorium should play a central role in personal enhancement strategies. However, this biohacking paradigm also raises complex questions regarding autonomy, the natural versus the technological, and the socio-political ramifications of commodifying bodily self-use. The article calls for a critical re-politicization of biohacking, one that acknowledges and interrogates the influences of consumerism and individualism while exploring the possibilities for a more holistic, nature-inspired approach to health and well-being.

Source:
Antti Lindfors. (2023). Between Self-Tracking and Alternative Medicine: Biomimetic Imaginary in Contemporary Biohacking. SAGE Publications, Volume 30, Issue 1. https://doi.org/10.1177/1357034X231218413