Saturday, March 04, 2006

iCyborg at
This is a group, currently with 46 members, founded in August 2005.
"a spot for future cyborgs and non-cyborgs to discuss cyborg news, cyborg issues, cyborg concerns, cyborg policies, cyborg politics, your views on why to become a cyborg or why not become a cyborg, and anything else cyborg.

All so that when the time comes we may make a better choice."

The site points to an interesting debate at a livejournal site called blindwatchmaker, wherein the meaning of "evolution" is contested. It's useful to work through this one: is the (now sort of old-fashioned) claim that we are evolving or posthuman or transhuman a philosophical claim, or a biological one? The problem is that many who have made the claim don't specify the difference, and actually seem to be quite equivocal about the question of biological evolution of species.

The quotation in quiestion, by Kevin Warwick in I, Cyborg:
"Humans will be able to evolve by harnessing the super-intelligence and extra abilities offered by the machines of the future, by joining with them. All this points to the development of a new techno-human species... But be warned - just as we humans split from our chimpanzee cousins years ago, so cyborgs will split from humans. Those who remain as mere humans are likely to become a sub-species. They will, effectively, be the chimpanzees of the future."

This seems to suggest explicitly a change in the frequency of alleles in a population from generation to generation. But of course, implanting computer chips under the skin doesn't change the genetic make-up of even one person, let alone a population. Even changing the expression of genes in a few people won't significantly affect the allele frequency of a population.


Post a Comment

<< Home