This contribution to the Futures Triangle special edition aims to open dialogue with the reader about what lies ahead for the Futures Triangle method and Futures Studies in general. The subsequent paragraphs explore how viewing the Futures Triangle through the lenses of new philosophies and approaches could impact the traditional concepts of Futures Studies.
AhlqvistToniRhisiartMartin. 2015. “Emerging Pathways for Critical Futures Research: Changing Contexts and Impacts of Social Theory.” Futures71 (August): 91–104.
2.
BaradKaren. 2007. Meeting the Universe Halfway - Quantum Physics and the Entanglement of Matter and Meaning. DURHAM & LONDON: Duke University Press, Kindle Edition.
3.
DalibertL.2014. Posthumanism and Somatechnologies : Exploring the Intimate Relations between Humans and Technologies. PhD. Enschede, The Netherlands: University of Twente.
4.
FerrandoFrancesca. 2013. “Posthumanism, Transhumanism, Antihumanism, Metahumanism, and New Materialisms: Differences and Relations.” Existenz8 (2): 26–32.
5.
FerrandoFrancesca. 2016. “Humans Have Always Been Posthuman: A Spiritual Genealogy of Posthumanism.” In Critical Posthumanism and Planetary Futures, edited by BanerjiDebashishParanjapeMakarand R., 243–256. New Delhi: Springer India.
6.
FerrandoFrancesca. 2019. Philosophical Posthumanism. London, New York, Oxford, New Delhi, Sydney: Bloomsbury Academic.
7.
FoucaultMichel. 1982. “The Subject and Power.” Critical Inquiry8 (4): 777–795.
8.
FoucaultMichelMartinLuther H.GutmanHuckHuttonPatrick H., eds. 1988. Technologies of the Self: A Seminar with Michel Foucault. Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press.
9.
GrahamTimothy. 2014. “Technologies of Choice: The Structural Shaping of ‘Choice’ on the World Wide Web.” In Challenging Identities, Institutions and Communities, 1–13. Queensland University of Technology: University of South Australia.
10.
Hernandez-RamirezRodrigo. 2017a. “Technologies of the Self- How are Digital Tools Affecting Human Ontologies.pdf.” In COAX. Lisbon, Portugal: University of Lisbon.
11.
Hernández-RamírezRodrigo. 2017b. “Technology and Self-Modification: Understanding Technologies of the Self after Foucault.” Journal of Science and Technology of the Arts, September, 45-57 Páginas.
12.
HintonPeta. 2013. “The Quantum Dance and the World’s ‘Extraordinary Liveliness’: Refiguring Corporeal Ethics in Karen Barad’s Agential Realism.” Somatechnics3 (1): 169–189.
13.
HollinGregoryForsythIslaGiraudEvaPottsTracey. 2017. “(Dis)Entangling Barad: Materialisms and Ethics.” Social Studies of Science47 (6): 918–941.
14.
HughesThomas ParkeHughesAgatha C.AllenMichael ThadHechtGabrielle, eds. 2001. Technologies of Power: Essays in Honor of Thomas Parke Hughes and Agatha Chipley Hughes. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.
InayatullahSohail. 2013. “Futures Studies: Theories and Methods.” There’s a Future: Visions for a Better World.
17.
Kosmala MacLullichKatarzyna. 2003. “The Emperor’s ‘New’ Clothes? New Audit Regimes: Insights From Foucault’s Technologies of the Self.” Critical Perspectives on Accounting14 (8): 791–811.
18.
MayoLiam. 2021. “Selves and Spaces: Hacking Culture in Postnormal Times.”
19.
MercerRalph. 2022. “Investigating ‘Habitus of Technology’ as a Framework to Better Understand Technologies of Learning: A Causal Layered Analysis of Two Perspectives.”
NiemimaaMarko. 2016. “Niemimaa - 2016 - Affordances and Agential Realism a Relational Ontology for a Relational Theory.” Portsmouth.
22.
RiedyChris. 2021. “The Critical Futurist: Richard Slaughter’s Foresight Practice.” Futures132: 102789.
23.
SchickKathyTothNicholas. 2013. “The Origins and Evolution of Technology.” In A Companion to Paleoanthropology, edited by BegunDavid R., 265–289. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
24.
Van Den EedeYoniGoeminneGertVan den BosscheMarc. 2017. “The Art of Living with Technology: Turning Over Philosophy of Technology’s Empirical Turn.” Foundations of Science22 (2): 235–246.
