I would rather watch the TEDx talk: “Our Neurotechnological Humanity“
Why are the Borg so disturbing? They are an alien race from Star Trek who roam the galaxy fusing hapless organisms with gruesome technology. You don’t need the full backstory to grok that being captured and transmogrified by them is a threat to your humanity. Perhaps the lesson is that technology robs us of our humanity. To protect our humanity maybe we must defend our bodies, especially our nervous system, which is arguably the seat of our identity, from technological transgression.
But it’s too late. We already use and rely on technology. From the simple necessities like clothes and sewing needles to the sophisticated digital technologies we use so easily most of us are essentially addicted to them. It’s an idea so basic that artists use depictions of these technologies to show us that we are looking at human beings. “Tool use”, that is technology use, is one of the things that sets us apart from the rest of the natural world and helps define us as humans. That’s why images of monkeys and octopuses using tools are so arresting – it makes them seem so human-like.
https://www.newscientist.com/article/2096664-monkey-stone-tools-in-brazil-pre-date-discovery-of-americas/
If it isn’t the mere use of technology that’s the problem and gives the Borg the “ick-factor,” then maybe it comes from taking things too far – that technology is ok up to a point, and we are at risk only once the technology becomes too sophisticated. Surely clothes, needle and thread, hammers, spears, glasses, headphones, and houses pose no threat because they’re relatively simple.
There are people who take this argument seriously and live by the courage of their convictions. Modern technology can threaten the Amish way of life, so it is prohibited. But we don’t typically view the Amish as preserving something fundamentally human, just as a way to preserve their culture. Most people see the embrace (or at least tolerance) of modern technology as a way to take part in the progress of the human story.
Galileo peering through a telescope and first observing that Jupiter had moons is an inspiring and quintessentially human story of discovery using new technology. Humanity’s imagination and spirit were invigorated when our technology delivered the first true-color picture of Earth from space. These endeavors bring us in touch with our humanity and is part of the long arc of history where we emerge from the state of nature using our technology to construct a better, safer, and more inspired world for ourselves. There’s nothing about a smartphone or car that feels like a threat to our human identity.
If technology itself isn’t driving our intuitions about the threat of integrating with technology and neither is the degree of technology what’s left? Perhaps it is the skin, the great barrier separating the outside world from the insides of our body – ourselves. Perhaps to trespass physically across the skin is the problem, the violation we’re searching for to make sense of our apprehension.
Consider the eye. We can correct/enhance/augment the eye with technology in many ways. We might start with corrective lenses that sit a couple centimeters from the cornea, then a telescope to enhance vision that nearly touches the cornea, then contact lenses that contact the cornea, then a replacement cornea to treat a disease (either from synthetic material or a donor), and finally a retinal prosthetic that is entirely within the eye making electrical connections with cells of the retina. Does any of this threaten our identity or humanity? Does it do more so as we get closer to or inside of the eye? I don’t think so. We don’t tend to view people with cornea implants as less human.
And most of us are fine ingesting technology that affects the very way we experience the world by manipulating our brains. Aspirin changes our perception of pain, caffeine changes our alertness, Ritalin enhances our focus, and presumably you are familiar with how drinking alcohol works. It’s all human.
We’re running out of reasons to be threatened by technology.
Ancient or modern, natural or synthetic, high-tech or simple; these technologies, and our pursuit, use, and betterment of them, don’t rob us of our identity or humanity, it is part of the essential human experience. The reason it is so hard to put your finger on why some technology, even neurotechnology, can be off-putting is because there isn’t anything wrong with it, it’s just new. And new technology is unfamiliar and takes time to get used to. Broadening our acceptance of technological advancement is central to how we live, and neural augmenting tools are no exception. In fact, they are the future.
Consider the so-called deep brain stimulation for Parkinson’s disease. A miracle therapy where a metal shank is inserted deep within the brain to target movement regulation centers. When electric current is applied in just the right way the hallmark limb tremors that Parkinson’s creates stop instantly. The entire system, from electrodes to battery pack to microcontroller, is implanted within the body. Users of these systems say it restores or preserves aspects of their identity rather than jeopardize them.
Similar therapies are on the verge of mainstream for issues even closer to personal identity, like mood disorders and major depression. Would we deride users of such brain stimulation therapy or the technology itself as a threat to our humanity? Or celebrate it?
Is it possible that if all the Borg’s repulsive circuitry were simply out of sight under the skin that our assessment of them would change? Uh, and provided it was implanted with our consent. I think we can’t take issue with pacemakers and deep brain stimulators even though they are fully implanted artificial systems that interface with and control our nervous systems.
The pursuit of discovery, technology, self-improvement: these are all a fundamental aspects of our humanity, not a threat to it. We should see these new technologies as though on a spectrum with caffeine on one end and brain-implanted electrodes on the other. The invention, and gradual cultural acceptance, of these technologies is what progress looks like in human civilization, sets us apart from the rest of the natural world, and grants us immense control over our own destinies.
What does the future of merging with our technology look like? The current edge between sci-fi and reality is invasive brain-computer interfaces. These are systems where, during delicate brain surgery, tiny pieces of conducting metal are inserted into brain regions used for movement, sensation, or speech. Wires carry out the neurons’ electrical impulses to a computer where algorithms try to guess simple thoughts the user is having, like “move a computer cursor up” or “type the letter ‘B’”. My lab works on improving the quality of these algorithms. Right now, brain-computer interfaces are used to give people living with paralysis a way to use their computer or compose email, but their long-term potential could be far greater.
As BCI algorithms improve, and we record from larger swaths of the brain, the far-future possibilities appear nearly limitless. We could control more sophisticated technologies, communicate seamlessly across distance, or even understand our own minds better. The striving for more control and more personal understanding are fundamentally human pursuits.
But we can go farther. And some have. Scientists at University of Pittsburg built a two-way robot arm BCI. Signals from movement brain areas are used to guess what the user wants the robot arm to do, then, when the robot’s fingers touch something, it reports back to the user how much pressure it is applying by directly activating brain sensory areas with electric current. Perhaps you can see how exhilarating this is: the human mind is at the heart of this technology, physically effecting the outside world and listening to its reply. It can open a fundamentally new mode for us to engage with the world, much like how the technology of language opened a fundamentally new mode of engaging with other people.
If we can create a sensation in someone’s mind of what a robot is touching, what is to stop us from generating other, potentially foreign sensations? Scientists at Duke University mounted a sensor on the head of a rat that could detect infrared light, a type of light that we (and rats) cannot see – its “below” the red on a rainbow. They plugged the sensor directly into the rat’s sensing brain area. Lo and behold, after about 40 sessions with this setup the rat learned to use infrared light to find to food. The rat gained a new sense.
This is definitely exotic, but in a way, it is something you experience all the time. You can effectively “sense” how full your car’s gas tank is by looking at the gas gauge. Here, they cut out the middle man (or middle eye, I guess). Why wouldn’t we want a direct feeling of how full the car’s tank is or, less prosaically, to appreciate the full beauty of nature by seeing directly all the colors our eyes are too constrained to take in? As methods, technologies, and neuroscience improves, this is where we are going. And it’s a good thing.
This next step in our technological advancement is just another in the long line of our escape from the state of nature. Each advance has the potential to improve our control and understanding of our world. The future will take us inside the body and mind, exploring more deeply a technological direction we have been moving in for centuries, and give us new ways to know and express ourselves. More so than ever, this new technology – neurotechnology – will have the human brain and mind at its center, interfacing with it directly/physically, opening the next chapter of humanity’s great journey to create our place in the world.