From a prosthetic arm to leg, Do you think with such technological advances in science and medicine to be possible to create such a feat as to combine man and machine. Do you think such a thing should be perused to enable our future generation the possibility to walk after a bone crushing accident or to be given the possibility to see with your own eyes. Or should they be left out as nature intended?
4 comments:
Since the yearly Fifties science fiction movies have depicted robots as very sophisticated machines built by humans to perform complex operations, to work with humans in safe critical missions, in hostile environments, or more often to pilot and control spaceships in galactic travels. At the same time, however, intelligent robots have also been depicted as dangerous machines, capable of working against man through wicked plans. In the Terminator the view of the future is even more catastrophic: robots will become intelligent and self-aware and will take over the human race.
The dual implication often accredited to science fiction robots represents the clear look of desire and fear that man has towards his technology. From one hand, in fact, man projects in a robot his wild desire of immortality, holds in a powerful and indestructible artificial being, which intellective, sensory, and motor capabilities are much more amplified than that of a normal man. On the other hand, however, there is a fear that a too advanced technology can get out of control, acting against humans, government and our current way of life. When I see this advertisement I think about the movie Irobot. Although the thought about creating robots to do our everyday chores can make our life much easier, however what would happen if we were to loose control of these robots are are smarter, faster, and stronger than everyday humans.
since the twenty first century, the thought of medical euphoria was thought to be met the the expectantly of flying automobiles, the robotic partners that help with the common need of simplicity. But as nature made death as natural as the fact of birth is it wise to mess with the balance of life after all one matter of life has to die for the other to live. now as technological advances have made it possible to increase life expectancy a couple of years more its it worth it ? I think not for recourses may change and adapt to out needs but space? how is it possible to increase space when no more can be created.
The ability to improve technology and machinery, enough to be able to merge it with people would be a huge accomplishment for the future. for those who have prosthetic arms or legs, they would have the chance to basically have a new arm or leg, getting the chance to move their limbs for the first time again.
If things were left "as nature intended" this blog, this comment, computers in general, and a great many other amenities would not exist. As much as I am an advocate of preserving nature and stopping humanity from completely destroying the wilds of this world, that is not what this post is talking about.
This post is asking whether we should inhibit scientific progress because some people are scared of new things. I for one, am vehemently against postponing scientific exploration and development for anything, much less some misguided and faulty principles. The benefits of combining human and technology are vast beyond imagination, but some people would have them halt due to ambiguous definitions of the word human and iffy concepts like souls and morality.
Post a Comment