Hi Stuart, I’ve been mulling over this over the week and I think that technology assisted medicine probably still is cyborg-esque in the same way that telephones are, they aren’t physically part of us (yet) but still contribute to our cyborg selves in Miller’s paper. That paper gave me a better understanding of the term cyborg and how to look at everyone now through that lens – we can’t see pacemakers or replacement hips for example sticking with the healthcare link. I now see the cyborgs in our videos as the extreme far end of the cyborg spectrum not the norm.
That is a really interesting article.
I don’t know if its coincidence but I have been noticing quite a lot of similar stories in the news this week about technology being used to advance healthcare.
If recent news is to be believed then we could increase our lifespan through technology assisted medicine rather than mechanical parts.
Do you think that is still cyborg-esque?
When I think of cyborgs I picture a character similar to the one in this week’s video ‘We only attack ourselves’. But what if there is no immediate visual sign of technology present?
from Comments on: Tweet http://ift.tt/2kP0hVf
During the second informal Togethertube session, my peers and I were discussing whether or not machines programmed with compassion and manners can have a positive influence on people they engage with. Therefore I can’t say that I was surprised to read about the possibility of robots being introduced to the social care setting.
Nor was I surprised to read of Japanese influence in this project considering there has been a reported surge in robotic companionship from Japan’s technology manufacturers.
For me, this article touches on both cybernetics and posthumanism.
Technological advances are not only looking to increase the longevity of the human race, but to provide a digital support network to accelerate the pace in which we achieve it.
I liked this post. I have been considering my views on some of the key questions that you raised:
Should we embrace technological advances to prolong and improve quality of life?
In my opinion, longevity – yes. Immortality no. I think that technology can improve quality of life far beyond the limits that we could achieve ourselves.
Where should we stop?
Can we stop?
Has our technological power outpaced our ability to make informed moral choices?
Would you agree that technology has shaped us as a race and as a society. That we want everything instantaneously at our fingertips?
Will it create further conflict and inequality and society?
I think it could solve some issues too – but certainly yes – I think that technology offers people an alias to escape the boundaries set by society.
from Comments on: Miller – The Body and Information Technology http://ift.tt/2jMj1FK