Are We All Natural-Born Cyborgs?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Mentat
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the concept of "Cyborgs," particularly the idea of "Natural-Born Cyborgs" as presented in Andy Clark's book. It explores the notion that humans are inherently cyborgs not just through physical enhancements but through cognitive extensions that integrate technology into our mental processes. Examples illustrate how we rely on external tools, like watches, as extensions of our own minds, highlighting our seamless interaction with technology in everyday life. The conversation emphasizes the evolving relationship between humans and technology, suggesting that as cultural and technological advancements continue, our cognitive processes will increasingly incorporate these non-organic extensions. The discussion also touches on personal experiences related to awareness of time and reliance on technology for information, reinforcing the idea of technology as an integral part of our cognitive framework.
Mentat
Messages
3,935
Reaction score
3
What comes to mind when you hear the word "Cyborg"? Is it an organic being with cybernetic technologies surgically added to it? Such a thing would surely meet the criterion of being both "cyb(ernetic)" and "org(anic)". However, there is another, even more interesting, way in which humans not only will become cyborgs, but already are. Indeed, it is an intrinsic part of our nature (as humans) to do this...we are natural-born cyborgs.

Instead of surgical enhancements, however, Natural-Born Cyborgs (by Andy Clark), deals with a much deeper relationship that we can have with non-organic extensions: namely: extensions of our mind beyond the lump of fat in our skulls.

In this excellent, layman-oriented, book, Clark looks both at ways in which we are already cyborgs (in this new, deeper, sense), and at the ways in which we will become more so, as our cultures and technologies evolve.

To give a taste of just how rich a relationship we have already begun to have, let's look at an example of a mental process. Let's say that I ask you "Do you know the year that Man first landed on the moon?". You would probably say "Yes, 1969". This doesn't mean that you were consciously thinking about the lunar landing at the time of being asked. You, most likely, were not constantly visualizing the year "1969". Yet, when I asked you if you knew, you did not hesitate to say "yes", because you could quickly retrieve it from your memory. This is how our brains naturally work (a very economical strategy). Well, now let's say that I had not asked you about landing on the moon, but instead asked "Do you know what time it is?". You would probably say "Yes" and then quick-check your wristwatch, and say "11:50" (or whatever the time actually was). You didn't say "No, but I can check", you treated the watch as though it were just another ready-at-hand part of your mind.

This may seem like somewhat irrelevant thing, but Clark gives many more compelling examples, as well as predictions of how our minds can continue to become more and more "cyborg" as culture and what he calls "human-oriented" technology evolve.

A very good read for anyone interested in the mind; written with clarity, intelligence, and humor. I highly recommend it.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
http://www.kitchenmedialab.org/download/cyborgmanifesto1.rtf by Donna Haraway.

(It seemed like a relevant link... Even though the text is pretty incoherent.)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Mentat said:
Well, now let's say that I had not asked you about landing on the moon, but instead asked "Do you know what time it is?". You would probably say "Yes" and then quick-check your wristwatch, and say "11:50" (or whatever the time actually was). You didn't say "No, but I can check", you treated the watch as though it were just another ready-at-hand part of your mind.

This reminds me of something that I noticed about myself (and other people).

Let's say I was waiting for the time to be 2:00 PM. As the the time draws near, I would look at my watch from time to time to see if it is 2:00 PM.

After I look at my watch, I don't know what time it is, I only recognized that it was not 2:00 PM.

If someones sees me look at my watch and asks me what time it is, I have to look at my watch again because I don't know the answer. (I guess if they asked me if it was 2:00 PM yet, I would have an answer.)

Does this happen to anyone else? (Maybe it's just me and few other mid-westerners.)
 
TL;DR Summary: Book after Sakurai Modern Quantum Physics I am doing a comprehensive reading of sakurai and I have solved every problem from chapters I finished on my own, I will finish the book within 2 weeks and I want to delve into qft and other particle physics related topics, not from summaries but comprehensive books, I will start a graduate program related to cern in 3 months, I alreadily knew some qft but now I want to do it, hence do a good book with good problems in it first...
TLDR: is Blennow "Mathematical Methods for Physics and Engineering" a good follow-up to Altland "Mathematics for physicists"? Hello everybody, returning to physics after 30-something years, I felt the need to brush up my maths first. It took me 6 months and I'm currently more than half way through the Altland "Mathematics for physicists" book, covering the math for undergraduate studies at the right level of sophystication, most of which I howewer already knew (being an aerospace engineer)...
Back
Top