No one will deny the value of helping those with injuries from loss of limb or aid the death or blind. However, do you really need to read your email or write reports with your mind? When I walk around, I see people distracted by phones how much more would this affect a person. Or what if you can hack into these implants and see what a person is doing through their own eyes.How long till a problem is seen with these tools and how often when you need it fixed.
A lot of this will require brain surgery to implant these chips.
Is giving someone these tools fair for others. Classism having others not be able to afford these. Is that fair for others giving a clear advantage that over nature gifts to each of us? Or will you be forced to have some of these implants if you want to work in a certain job field?
Most likely both of kinds of augmentation will be used in the future however, I’d still like to full compare these against each other.
In the end, I think the reader should decide however now that we’ve pro and con both types let have them square off.
Are one of these two types of modification better than the other. I find it hard to say but let’s look at the facts. Cybernetics and bionics are more availed to people in the way that at any stage in life they can be implanted with these upgrades.
Sense abilities greater than the animal kingdom could be achieved with these implants. Also, limb replacement with prosthetics is already widely excepted unlike cloning and growing a replacement. A more isolated effect if something is wrong then it will only affect people who had surgery. Unlike genetic engineering that could be passed down the line.
The advantages of cybernetics and bionics are numerous when you look at it. Cybernetics can’t cure HIV or cancer or improve basic physical abilities like intelligence. Tools can aid people in a task but cannot fundamentally improve basic ability. A book can provide information to look up but, cannot improve memory for people. So this could lead people with cybernetics just having reduced memory skills and mathematical abilities overall. Wherewith a few tweaks one could just modify these for better cognition.
The risk outweighs the befits in many ways that have been said by many people. Or that this will only be for the rich. The argument is true that often the rich have access to new technologies. Reading and writing were only for wealthy people to have such. However, just like the car and learning it became common for the masses.
This could be a frontier that could make better lives for our children and children’s children. Will people be inclined to think lesser of those with or without these augmentations? Using science to prove people better or not as basis being of nature and not of design? With that in mind, the decisions as such not are made lightly on not if we should use augmentation and moreover what kinds should be embraced.
Closing comments what are humans? Are the products of nature or a god(s)? What are humans created by humans? Cities, agriculture, industry, and rising cattle all human works that are not truly natural. Maybe we are already in regard to what we are supposed to be artificial humans, and this is just the next step stimming that direction. Artificial = fake, false, or insincere to describe artificial perhaps we should remember what that word is defined as.
👋 Hi! I’m your smart assistant Amy!
Don’t know where to start? Type your requirements and I’ll connect you to an academic expert within 3 minutes.get help with your assignment