Author: Olivia S.

To Merge or Not to Merge

Olivia S.
Reading Time: 2 minutes

In the age of rapid scientific advancements, the concept of creating hybrid creatures—a fusion of human and animal characteristics—is no longer confined to science fiction. With technologies like CRISPR and genetic engineering advancing, we are inching closer to realizing such possibilities. This philosophical exercise allows us to reflect on the implications of merging human and animal traits.

If I could hybridize with one animal, I would choose the dolphin. Dolphins are highly intelligent and exhibit advanced communication skills, social behavior, and unparalleled aquatic abilities. They are often seen as a symbol of harmony between intellect and nature, making them an ideal choice for a hybridization experiment.

Why a Dolphin?

Dolphins possess traits that are uniquely appealing:

  1. Cognitive Abilities: Dolphins have large brains relative to their body size, exhibiting problem-solving skills, self-awareness, and complex emotions. Integrating such traits could enhance human intellect and emotional intelligence.
  2. Communication: Their echolocation and intricate vocalizations could revolutionize how humans interact and understand one another, even at great distances.
  3. Physical Capabilities: Dolphins can dive deep, swim at remarkable speeds, and safely navigate underwater. These abilities could allow us to explore and thrive in aquatic environments, potentially opening new avenues for undersea colonization or resource acquisition.
This image was created by ChatGPT on Nov 27, 2024. https://chatgpt.com/c/67477210-1b48-8009-8980-d0f132f14cb7

While the idea of becoming part dolphin is thrilling, I would want to limit the physical transformation. My ideal hybridization would involve the following:

  • Enhanced Brain Functionality: Incorporating traits that improve problem-solving, memory, and emotional regulation.
  • Adapted Physiology: Gaining the ability to hold my breath for extended periods and swim efficiently. This could include minor anatomical changes, such as slightly webbed hands and feet.
  • Echolocation: Developing this ability could revolutionize navigation, even on land, particularly in low-visibility environments.

The extent to which I would give up my humanity is limited by how much these changes would impact my ability to live among humans and maintain my identity. While I value the enhancements a dolphin’s traits could provide, I would avoid changes that would:

  • Compromise my ability to communicate in human language.
  • Alter my physical appearance to the point of alienation.
  • Undermine my capacity for deep human connections.

Maintaining a balance between humanity and the enhancements would be critical to ensuring that the transformation enriches, rather than detracts from, my existence.

Hybridization raises profound ethical questions. Would such changes alienate individuals from society? How would we regulate who can undergo such transformations? These are questions we must address as we explore the potential of genetic engineering. Organizations like The Center for Genetics and Society are already fostering conversations around responsible use of such technologies

Hybridization offers an exciting glimpse into the future of humanity’s evolution. By thoughtfully integrating traits from other species, we could enhance our capabilities and deepen our connection with the natural world. However, this must be done cautiously, ensuring that we preserve the essence of what it means to be human. What animal would you hybridize with, and how far would you go? Let the philosophical debate begin.

Explore more on this topic:

The Future of Corporate Power

Olivia S.
Reading Time: 3 minutes

The cyberpunk genre has long been a fascinating lens through which we explore the dark potential of corporate power. Through its narratives, we encounter megacorporations whose greed and influence often override ethics, governments, and even humanity itself. By analyzing examples such as the Tyrell Corporation from Blade Runner, the Tessier-Ashpool family in Neuromancer, and the “pill funders” in Machinehood, we confront chilling portrayals of unchecked corporate dominance. But are these scenarios plausible futures or exaggerated critiques of our current trajectory?

Corporate Power in Cyberpunk: A Glimpse into Dystopia

In Blade Runner, the Tyrell Corporation exemplifies corporate overreach. It is a monolithic entity with near-total control over artificial intelligence and robotics. Tyrell’s replicants, humanoid robots designed for labor, demonstrate the moral compromise inherent in a profit-driven ethos. The corporation’s disregard for the ethical implications of its technology echoes concerns in contemporary AI and biotechnology sectors. Similarly, in William Gibson’s Neuromancer, the Tessier-Ashpools are a wealthy and isolated family who control a massive conglomerate. Their pursuit of immortality and power through artificial intelligence creates a world where human individuality is subservient to corporate goals.

Lastly, Machinehood by S.B. Divya introduces the “pill funders,” corporate entities controlling pharmaceutical and biomechanical enhancements essential to daily life. These companies dictate who has access to resources, exploiting desperation for profit. Their stranglehold on healthcare resonates with modern concerns about pharmaceutical monopolies.

This image was created on ChatGPT on Nov 27, 2024. https://chatgpt.com/c/67477bc2-2978-8010-b7df-4172e8b2e2e5

Modern Parallels: Reality or Exaggeration?

Many of these cyberpunk tropes feel disturbingly relevant. Consider the influence of contemporary tech giants like Amazon, Meta, and Google. These corporations not only dominate their industries but also shape global infrastructure, public discourse, and even privacy laws. In 2021, Amazon was criticized for using algorithms that prioritized efficiency over worker safety, drawing parallels to the dehumanizing labor systems seen in Blade Runner.

Pharmaceutical companies also bear a resemblance to Machinehood’s pill funders. The opioid crisis, exacerbated by aggressive marketing and lobbying by corporations like Purdue Pharma, demonstrates the deadly consequences of profit-driven healthcare. Similarly, the monopolization of insulin production has led to life-saving medication being priced out of reach for many—a direct echo of cyberpunk’s dystopian critiques.

However, these depictions can also feel hyperbolic. For all their faults, many corporations do face public and governmental checks, particularly in democratic societies. Regulations like the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and increased antitrust scrutiny in the U.S. indicate that corporate power, while significant, is not absolute.

Are We Heading There?

The question remains: are we truly on a path to the corporate dystopias of cyberpunk? The answer lies somewhere in between. While cyberpunk narratives provide valuable critiques of corporate greed and unchecked power, they often amplify reality to provoke reflection and action. They remind us of the dangers of complacency in the face of growing corporate influence. Presently, we see these exploitative conditions in big corporations, such as Apple, that have led to dystopian-like conditions in the Congo due to greed for materials like cobalt and uranium, used to make iPhones and other Apple products.

By engaging with these narratives and drawing parallels to our world, we are equipped to challenge harmful systems before they solidify. As the line between fiction and reality blurs, it becomes vital to question, regulate, and resist structures that prioritize profit over humanity.

For further reading, explore the following resources:

The corporate dystopias of cyberpunk are not inevitable, but they serve as a stark warning. The future depends on our vigilance, resistance, and insistence on ethical practices that prioritize humanity over profit.

Evolving Beyond Nature

Olivia S.
Reading Time: 3 minutes

As someone aspiring to be a tissue engineer, I am particularly fascinated by how biological and technological advancements will shape our health, longevity, and quality of life. In my lifetime, I believe human augmentation will advance significantly, blending biology and technology to redefine our potential. From medical enhancements like prosthetics and implants to cognitive and sensory upgrades, the trajectory of innovation suggests profound changes in how we interact with the world and ourselves.

The future holds exciting possibilities in both bioengineering and technology. Tissue engineering, for instance, could lead to creating custom organs grown from a patient’s cells, minimizing the risk of rejection and ending reliance on donor shortages. This is a field that I am particularly interested in making an impact in. Beyond medical needs, advancements in biomaterials might allow the development of muscle-enhancing or bone-strengthening augmentations. Neural interfaces, like brain-computer interfaces (BCIs), could expand cognitive abilities, improving memory, creativity, or problem-solving skills. Sensory enhancements might allow us to perceive wavelengths of light or sound beyond the human spectrum, fundamentally changing how we experience the world.

This image was generated by ChatGPT on November 23, 2024. https://chatgpt.com/c/6742c2b0-03c0-8009-8aab-afc6882003c7

I would embrace augmentations aligned with health, productivity, and enhancing human experience. As a tissue engineer, the ability to repair or replace damaged tissues and organs using bioengineered solutions would be incredibly fulfilling. This could aid in treating patients suffering from the long-lasting effects of substance abuse as well as complications from cancer treatments. For myself, I’d consider integrating augmentations that improve bone and muscle strength/recovery as I, sadly, tend to have bad joints. Of course, there are enhancements in this field that I do not believe should be explored.

Ethically, I believe certain boundaries must be upheld. Modifications that compromise individuality or autonomy, such as permanent BCIs controlled by corporations or governments, are unacceptable. Genetic enhancements solely for aesthetic or superficial traits raise concerns about societal pressure, inequality, and the loss of diversity. This can create a heirarchy that beniefits the rich and demeans or disenfranchises those who cannot afford this. A great example of this would be in the movie Gattaca (for those who don’t know this movie here is the trailer). Ultimately, augmentations that are irreversible, unsafe, or exclude large portions of society due to cost or access disparities would exacerbate existing inequalities, which is contrary to the inclusive goals of medicine and technology.

From the perspective of a future tissue engineer, the implications of augmentation also carry responsibility. The technology we develop must prioritize improving lives while respecting ethical principles. Tissue-engineered solutions, for example, should focus on restoring health and function rather than creating an unnecessary hierarchy of abilities.

This image was generated by ChatGPT on November 24, 2024. https://chatgpt.com/c/6742c2b0-03c0-8009-8aab-afc6882003c7

Human augmentation holds incredible promise, but it must be guided by ethical considerations to ensure inclusivity and fairness. As someone entering the field of bioengineering, I see a future where science empowers us to overcome diseases, disabilities, and even natural limitations without compromising our humanity. By focusing on augmentations that enhance life in meaningful, equitable ways, we can ensure this evolution remains a force for good. To learn more about the ethics of tissue engineering, take a look at this paper published by The Journal of Applied Tissue Engineering.

What is it to Even Be Human?

Olivia S.
Reading Time: 3 minutes

Donna Haraway’s Cyborg Manifesto and Janelle Monáe’s Dirty Computer may appear to be from vastly different worlds—an academic essay from the mid-1980s and a futuristic concept album from 2018. Yet, both works converge on shared themes of identity, resistance, and the fluidity of the human identity. Haraway’s cyborg—a fusion of machine and organism that disrupts conventional boundaries—is mirrored in Monáe’s portrayal of “dirty computers,” individuals whose non-conforming identities challenge societal norms in a dystopian world. Monáe takes Haraway’s theoretical vision and weaves it into a heartfelt narrative, exploring fluidity, rebellion, and liberation.

Haraway’s essay imagines a “post-gender” world where identity is no longer constrained by traditional binaries. Her cyborg metaphor dismantles divisions such as human/machine, nature/culture, and male/female, arguing that these boundaries perpetuate inequality. Similarly, Monáe’s album celebrates identities that resist categorization, representing her own fluid identity. Songs like “PYNK” embrace the fluidity of gender and sexuality, rejecting fixed definitions in favor of a spectrum. Monáe’s lyrics and visuals suggest that liberation lies in embracing multiplicity—an idea central to Haraway’s manifesto.

This image was created by ChatGPT on 22 November 2024. https://chatgpt.com/c/6740b8ff-9844-8009-bf63-205b500367fd

Moreover, Haraway frames the cyborg as inherently political, a symbol of resistance against oppressive systems. This is vividly echoed in Monáe’s Dirty Computer, which tells the story of Jane 57821, a rebel in a society that “cleans” non-conforming individuals to erase their identities. Tracks like “Django Jane” and “Crazy, Classic, Life” celebrate defiance and self-expression, aligning with Haraway’s vision of the cyborg as a figure that destabilizes oppressive power structures. Monáe’s dystopia critiques real-world systems of control, from surveillance to social conformity, much like Haraway’s cyborg challenges the dominance of capitalist and patriarchal ideologies. Haraway’s cyborg can be further examined in this analysis by Rebecca Pohl.

Monáe also mirrors Haraway’s exploration of technology as a double-edged sword. In Cyborg Manifesto, technology is both a tool of oppression and a means of subversion. The cyborg’s hybridity offers a way to reimagine identity beyond traditional limits. Similarly, Monáe’s album presents technology as a battleground. Songs like “Screwed” critique how power exploits technological tools, while the album’s narrative ultimately suggests that technology can also be reclaimed for liberation. The concept of being a “dirty computer” embraces the idea of imperfection as a form of resistance, much like Haraway’s cyborg rejects purity in favor of hybrid identities.

Finally, both Haraway and Monáe emphasize the importance of collective solidarity. Haraway envisions a world where the cyborg fosters new alliances that transcend race, gender, and class. Monáe’s work embodies this ethos, particularly in her collaboration with diverse artists and her calls for unity among marginalized communities. Songs like “Americans” highlight the intersections of different struggles, advocating for a future where differences are celebrated rather than erased.

In blending the theoretical with the personal, Haraway and Monáe challenge us to envision futures where identity is not a source of division but a wellspring of creativity and strength. While Haraway provides the framework, Monáe breathes life into it, creating a vivid, emotionally resonant exploration of what it means to resist conformity in a world that demands uniformity. Together, they remind us that the boundaries we draw—between human and machine, male and female, self and other—are not fixed but fluid, and in that fluidity lies the potential for radical transformation. To get a more in depth review of Monae’s album Dirty Computer, check out this link.

To Be or Not to Be Human?

Olivia S.
Reading Time: 3 minutes

What does it really mean to be human? Is it emotions? Is it compassion and empathy? Many writers and artists alike have explored this in the realm of cyberpunk, specifically focusing on transhumanism. Transhumanism is the philosophical movement that advocates for human advancement through technological means, enhancing human cognition and biological capabilities. Two works, Bladerunner and Neuromancer, explore the boundaries of humanity through the idea of transhumanism. Bladerunner, a 1982 film directed by Ridley Scott, uses androids called “replicants” to explore what it means to be human through their interactions with a police officer, Deckard, who hunts replicants. Throughout the movie, we see how his connections humanize the replicants that society views as monstrous machines. For example, Deckard develops a romantic relationship with a replicant named Rachael, who was created to have feelings. Throughout the movie, the main argument against replicants was that they did not have emotions and never would due to their short lifespans. However, Rachael broke this mold because she had emotions from the memories she was programmed with. These memories also prevented her from knowing she was a replicant, and she experienced sadness when she discovered it. These emotions caused Deckard to see another side to the replicants he had been hunting for years. He replaced his hate with pity and, in Rachael’s case, love. The absence of humanity in the replicants is also challenged because, throughout the film, the other replicants actually do have some emotion. They fear their impending death and have a strong sense of loyalty and compassion for one another. Roy and the other replicants ruthlessly hurt and betrayed the humans they utilized to get more information to extend their lives, but they did it because they were afraid of losing everything they had done in their time alive. This is what Roy explains in the end to Deckard before he ultimately dies.

Mukhisa Kituyi, Secretary-General of United Nations Conference Trade And Development (UNCTAD) with Sophia during the Word Investment Forum 2018. 22 october 2018. UN Photo/Jean Marc Ferré. his file is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 2.0 Generic license.

     Neuromancer is a novel written by William Gibson in 1984 that explores the story of a hacker named Case, who is tasked with helping a mysterious man named Armitage by targeting an artificial intelligence in exchange for fixing his nervous system. The novel explores transhumanism and humanity in many ways. One example is, of course, Case himself. Before his surgery, Case felt detached from his physical, human body. Throughout that time, he describes himself as “a dead man” who is trapped in a “meat” body. He feels more connected and alive in cyberspace, but this doesn’t strip him of his humanity. He relies on machines and technology to fully feel like himself while hating his physical form. This idea directly pushes against the ideas of humanism, which advocate for humans and the human form being the pinnacle of the universe. Furthermore, Gibson highlights the boundaries of humanity in the characteristics of Wintermute, the AI that was being targeted. Throughout the book, we see how its goal is to merge with Neuromancer to overcome its limitations, and it manipulates humans like Case, Molly, and Armitage to try to achieve that. Wintermute’s manipulation raises questions about its sentience and intelligence, which are akin to traits of humanity. Wintermute also seems to have motives and ambitions, which are also very common amongst humanity and further humanize it. Wintermute’s character challenges the notion of what constitutes consciousness and whether being alive is confined to organic life or extends to artificial life. This humanization of technology, specifically artificial intelligence, is now becoming a reality and can be further explored in this article by Medium.

Who is Really Educated?

Olivia S.
Reading Time: 2 minutes

Over the years, we have seen a shift in the standard of being “educated.” Of course, as humans advance and grow with technology and other resources, we see a change in who society considers “educated” and who it does not. Before, it was common to infer that a bachelor’s degree was enough to be considered educated. It was enough to get an entry-level position, hold managerial positions, or even teach in many states. As we move further into the 2020s, it has become apparent that a bachelor’s degree is not enough anymore; the boundary for being labeled as educated has been moved. Without several years of experience, and in many cases a graduate degree, many graduating students struggle to find decent work in their fields. This coupled with the drastic rise in the price of education has pushed many students to seek jobs that are unrelated to their passions and the degree that they worked hard to obtain, highlighting how a bachelor’s degree is no longer within the boundaries of “educated” in the professional sector of society.

I believe this can be attributed to the cost and prevalence of higher education. As the cost of education rises, leaving students in hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt to institutions, the government, and private loan companies, it is clear that there is substantial capital to be gained from higher education. In the United States, students are heavily exploited for the sake of being “educated” with the high price tag of education when other countries offer education for a fraction of the price with more equitable loan plans. Because of this exploitation in the US, I believe that there has been a large push towards the expectation of graduate school qualifications in entry-level positions. Along with the financial exploitation of students, society has created an issue where the bachelor’s degree is no longer significant enough. Throughout the years, society has pushed young people to become educated because they will stand out; however, they cannot stand out as bachelor’s degrees become more common, creating the need to pursue graduate school. The lack of exclusivity of a bachelor’s causes many students to seek graduate school for a better job. This lack of exclusivity, in my opinion, will soon move on to master’s degrees and they will not be as significant as they once were for this reason.