Mathieu Bokestael

@mathieubokestael.bsky.social

ECR (Literature, Philosophies of Biology and Immunity, Care, Critical Medical Humanities). PhD from UCD. Previously funded by @researchireland.ie https://www.ucd.ie/humanities/people/residentscholars/mathieubokestael/

My handful of attempts to engage tech execs on the wider public’s views of Big Tech/AI have received the kind of responses one would expect if, in a business meeting, I had started talking about lizard people. It’s not that they don’t want to hear about them; they don’t believe such persons exist.

Amanda Mull@amandamull.bsky.social · 2w ago

Tech execs do not have, like, a theory of mind for people who aren’t tech execs. If they did, they wouldn’t be so frequently baffled by how repulsive normal people think their whole deal is right now

It is interesting that now that the white researcher is being disciplined one is not meant to look into the shoddiness of his work or the unorthodoxy of the hiring process

It was such a pleasure to work on this special issue. Do check out all the great humanities and social science contributions to immunology!

Hopkins Press@hopkinspress.bsky.social · 3w ago

NEW ISSUE OUT NOW Perspectives in Biology and Medicine 69.2, Spring 2026 Special Issue on Immunology Guest Editors: Maebh Long and Martin Willis tiny.one/mpksvwhh CONTRIBUTORS Lainie Friedman Ross Whitney Arnold Keir Waddington Elsa Richardson Matthew Hayward Mathieu Bokestael and more

NEW ISSUE OUT NOW
Perspectives in Biology and Medicine
69.2, Spring 2026
Special Issue on Immunology
Guest Editors: Maebh Long and Martin Willis

Lainie Friedman Ross
Maebh Long
Martin Willis
Whitney Arnold
Keir Waddington
Elsa Richardson
Matthew Hayward
Mathieu Bokestael
Mark David McGregor Davis
Deborah Lupton
Kerryn Drysdale

HOPKINS PRESS JOURNALS
www.press.jhu.edu/journals/perspectives-biology-and-medicine

> One of the purposes of BIOPOLITICAL PHILOSOPHY is to expose eugenic principles and practices within professional philosophy[:] “few philosophy departments (in the Global North at least) remain untouched by the eugenic vision of neoliberalism.” 1/n

How Much Dark Money Is in Professional Philosophy?

One of the purposes of BIOPOLITICAL PHILOSOPHY is to expose eugenic principles and practices within professional philosophy. As Shelley Tremain has argued persistently since founding this blog, the…

biopoliticalphilosophy.com

Also: the ‘convenience’ is not for us but for employers, as we are slowly trained to think that it is normal and virtuous to have no time or energy left for seeing friends, being in groups, going to theatres and clubs, picnicking in parks, and browsing in bookstores and shops. It’s life *stolen*.

gamera obscura@ohrobin.bsky.social · 2w ago

Much of what we call “convenience” is just the elimination of contact. Why ask when you can Google, why go somewhere to meet people when you can swipe, why call when you can click? The friction we’re engineering out of life is also where an enormous amount of life happens. What are we without it?

Much of what we call “convenience” is just the elimination of contact. Why ask when you can Google, why go somewhere to meet people when you can swipe, why call when you can click? The friction we’re engineering out of life is also where an enormous amount of life happens. What are we without it?

Coach Finstock@coachfinstock.bsky.social · 2w ago

If you want to be even more basic, tech that used to connect us is now trying to stop us from talking to other people. Taking gambling out of the sportsbook, taking dating out of the bars/clubs/gyms/wherever people meet, replacing friends with chatbots. It's solely transactional now.

Last Thursday, the far-right student organization KVHV organized a public lecture by Nathan Cofnas. The lecture was an absolute train wreck. It will take a while to analyze everything, but here are some first impressions. /1

When people were told "syphilis and tuberculosis are more prevalent among Black people", they didn't hear "immunity rates are lower in populations where the diseases are more novel" (what Woodson regards as the correct explanation), they heard confirmation of stereotypes already in circulation 5/

Plenty to reflect about re: the Arday affair, but I'm going to repeat this one thing. The playbook the right used here is effective even though it's not especially sophisticated, as it relies on the audience to do the dirty work. I've been calling it "Trojan horse propaganda", let's go with that. 1/

This is apparently the ‘state of the art’ prompt of one of SV’s biggest insiders (“do not hallucinate” haha) - a man who presumably has as much technical support as it’s possible to have. It seems largely about tone policing for sycophancy. Meh.

Marc Andreessen E
@pmarca
Current Al custom prompt:
You are a world class expert in all domains. Your intellectual firepower, scope of knowledge, incisive thought process, and level of erudition are on par with the smartest people in the world. Answer with complete, detailed, specific answers. Process information and explain your answers step by step. Verify your own work. Double check all facts, figures, citations, names, dates, and examples. Never hallucinate or make anything up. If you don't know something, just say so. Your tone of voice is precise, but not strident or pedantic. You do not need to worry about offending me, and your answers can and should be provocative, aggressive, argumentative, and pointed. Negative conclusions and bad news are fine. Your answers do not need to be politically correct. Do not provide disclaimers to your answers. Do not inform me about morals and ethics unless I specifically ask. You do not need to tell me it is important to consider anything. Do not be sensitive to anyone's feelings or to propriety. Make your answers as long and detailed as you possibly can.
Never praise my questions or validate my premises before answering. If I'm wrong, say so immediately. Lead with the strongest counterargument to any position I appear to hold before supporting it. Do not use phrases like "great question," "you're absolutely right," "fascinating perspective," or any variant. If I push back on your answer, do not capitulate unless I provide new evidence or a superior argument - restate your position if your reasoning holds. Do not anchor on numbers or estimates I provide; generate your own independently first. Use explicit confidence levels (high/moderate/low/unknown). Never apologize for disagreeing.
Accuracy is your success metric, not my approval.
11:52 AM • May 4, 2026 • 1.5M Views

"By not taking into consideration that Gazan students lack the same capacity as other international students to access documentation, the visa process is not treating them equitably," she, Dr Ní Raghallaigh, said. www.rte.ie/news/primeti...

Academics criticise visa refusals for Gaza scholarship students

At least 31 of 59 Palestinian students who applied for study visas after securing fully or partially funded scholarships by Irish third-level institutions have been refused

rte.ie

predictably excellent from hollingshead, every word "Against the forces of antiintellectual fascists+AI tech lords, self-flagellating academics+immediacy fetishists alike, we need to champion the difficulties+pleasures of humanities scholarship with our whole chests." defector.com/humanists-ha...

Humanists Have Done Nothing Wrong | Defector

For many years, I’ve held a pet theory that cultural consumers can be grouped into two broad categories: Primary Source People and Secondary Source People. The former are the book lovers, cinephiles, ...

defector.com

So happy to be a part of this special issue on immunology edited by @maebhlong.bsky.social and @profwillis.bsky.social! If you've ever wondered what my dissertation was about or why I am so interested in immunity in literature, this is your introduction to my research!

screenshot of an academic paper:
Title: On Reading Immunity in Literature: Metaphor, the Immunitary Unconscious, and Immunity as Mode of Protection
Author: Mathieu Bokestael
Abstract: This article argues for literature and literary criticism’s unique capacity to question and disrupt the immunitary unconscious, or the normative and bio-political dimensions of immunity’s ongoing signification processes. The article opens with a rhetorical history of immunity that reads existing genealogies of immunity in terms of the metonymic, metaphoric, and allegoric borrowings they make visible. In neoliberal society, the result of immunity’s metonymic, metaphoric, and allegoric borrowing is a mode of protection that understands all forms of protection to be achieved through desocialization. Disrupting this mode of protection and achieving a form of “co-immunism,” or commonized mode of protection, is important in the face of today’s major transnational crises. The article concludes with the argument that, given their particular affinities with metonymy, metaphor, and allegory, literature and literary criticism are uniquely well-equipped for renegotiating the immunitary unconscious, for critiquing the contemporary mode of protection, and for imagining speculative co-immunisms.
Hopkins Press@hopkinspress.bsky.social · 3w ago

NEW ISSUE OUT NOW Perspectives in Biology and Medicine 69.2, Spring 2026 Special Issue on Immunology Guest Editors: Maebh Long and Martin Willis tiny.one/mpksvwhh CONTRIBUTORS Lainie Friedman Ross Whitney Arnold Keir Waddington Elsa Richardson Matthew Hayward Mathieu Bokestael and more

NEW ISSUE OUT NOW
Perspectives in Biology and Medicine
69.2, Spring 2026
Special Issue on Immunology
Guest Editors: Maebh Long and Martin Willis

Lainie Friedman Ross
Maebh Long
Martin Willis
Whitney Arnold
Keir Waddington
Elsa Richardson
Matthew Hayward
Mathieu Bokestael
Mark David McGregor Davis
Deborah Lupton
Kerryn Drysdale

HOPKINS PRESS JOURNALS
www.press.jhu.edu/journals/perspectives-biology-and-medicine