ICT Implants

Abstract

Is the human body a suitable place for a microchip? Such discussion is no longer hypothetical-in fact in reality it has not been so for some years. Restorative devices such as pacemakers and cochlear implants have become well established, yet these sophisticated devices form notably intimate links between technology and the body. More recent developments in engineering technologies have meant that the integration of silicon with biology is now reaching new levels-with devices which interact directly with the brain. As medical technologies continue to advance, their potential benefits for human enhancement will become increasingly attractive, and so we need to seriously consider where this may take us. In this paper, an attempt is made to demonstrate that, in the medical context, the foundations of more advanced implantable enhancement technologies are already notably progressed, and that they are becoming more science fact than is widely considered. A number of wider moral, ethical and legal issues stem from enhancement applications and it is difficult to foresee the social consequences, the fundamental changes on our very conception of self and the impact on our identity of adoption long term. As a result, it is necessary to acknowledge the possibilities and is timely to have debate to address the wider implications these possibilities may bring.

Who Will Be the Members of Society 5.0? Towards an Anthropology of Technologically Posthumanized Future Societies

“…The first dynamic is exemplified by human beings' growing use of mobile and wearable devices (Castells et al 2007;Ernst 2016;Delabrida Silva et al 2018), online social media (Sahlin 2015) and e-commerce (Qin et al 2014), augmented and virtual reality systems (Bainbridge 2011; Craig 2013; Jerald 2015; Aukstakalnis 2017), and neuroprosthetic devices developed for purposes of therapy or human enhancement (Merkel et al 2007;Gasson 2008;McGee 2008;Fleischmann 2009;Fairclough 2010;Gasson et al 2012). The second dynamic is exemplified by the increasing sophistication and expanding use of technologies relating to social and emotional robotics (Breazeal 2003;Bradshaw et al 2009 -which all result in the world becoming "re-enchanted", in becoming "wild" once again, as it becomes filled with myriad diverse sources of embodied non-human agency that can detect and respond to human beings' actions, emotional states, and even thoughts in creative, meaningful, and often unpredictable ways.…”

An Axiology of Information Security for Futuristic Neuroprostheses: Upholding Human Values in the Context of Technological Posthumanization

“…The danger that neuroprostheses may not support their users' biological agency becomes more acute when considering the expected expansion of neuroprosthetics into the realm of human enhancement (Merkel et al, 2007 ; Gasson, 2008 ; McGee, 2008 ; Gasson et al, 2012 ). Future neuroprostheses may not be supplied by healthcare institutions interested solely in their patients' wellbeing but by military organizations deploying neuroprostheses to create more lethal augmented soldiers (Coker, 2004 ; Moreno, 2004 ; Kourany, 2014 ; Krishnan, 2015 ) or profit-oriented electronics firms seeking to offer computer gamers more immersive, thrilling, and potentially addictive VR experiences (Heidt, 1999 ; Kierkegaard, 2010 ; Scherer et al, 2012 ; Griffiths, 2017 ; Loup-Escande et al, 2017 ).…”