Encouraging the Future of Assistive Technology

What does it mean to be human? This question is fundamental in the debate over the legitimacy and ethics of assistive technology and human enhancement. As innovations in nanotechnology, biomedical, and robotic fields continues to develop, the possibility of substantial human enhancement (in some form) appears to be a real possibility. The class text subdivides these not too distance advancements into a number of categories, based on the kind of problem they solve (or fail to solve), and who is most likely to benefit. These categories range from the elimination of devastating diseases, all the way up to fundamental modifications of the mechanics (and definition)of the human body. For the sake of this post, I will primarily focus on the field of non-permanent, non-medical enhancements. Advanced prosthesis and assistive machinery have the potential to dramatically improve the abilities of the human body, whether the application is to assisting amputees or simply enhancing the mobility of everyday users. Assistive technology and robotic enhancement development should be encouraged in the future, assuming that proper regulation can be enforced and approved.

The first and primary usage of this technology could obviously be in the assistance of the injured or handicapped individuals. As mentioned in the text, many of the simple technologies we take for granted at present could fall into this category. The glasses that allow me to focus on this computer screen enable me to accomplish much more as a student than I could unaided. On a much more serious level, robotics that allow mobility in amputees or paralyzed individuals could change the lives of a number of people around the world. Of course, with any benefit, there are a number of barriers that would need to be overcome before unlimited adoption of this mentality could be made. One of the most common is that of technology distribution. This is a highly valid concern; costs for prosthetic limbs today can cost anywhere from $5000-$50,000 dollars (1). As prosthetics get more advanced and capable, it stands to reason that this cost spectrum will increase even further. Despite the inequality in technology distribution, however, there are very tangible overall benefits to innovations, even if they only initially benefit the wealthiest. For instance, the lithium-ion batteries powering the expensive electric wheelchair described in the text have (on average) almost halved in $/kWh in the last 5 years, from over 900 $/kWh to less than 500 $/kWh (2). This means that dramatically more energy dense batteries could be enjoyed by those who were previously only able to afford a tiring manual wheelchair or heavy lead-acid powered unit. This effect is bolstered by the economies of scale, and the increasing knowledge base around designing with the new technology. Despite inequalities existing in the introduction of a new technology, the applications of innovations to handicapped individuals benefits the handicapped community at large in the long run.

A secondary and more general use of human enhancement technology could be for entertainment, athletic and general mobility purposes. Mountaineering enthusiasts could travel further and higher, and gain access to locations and experiences that they otherwise could not. Workers who needed to lift heavy loads or stand on their feet all day long could gain a reprieve from the physical pain. Even among the general public, I suspect most individuals might enjoy the ability to jump higher, walk faster, and so on. Who knows, perhaps even CO2 emissions could be lowered as the need for cars decreased. At the same time, there would doubtlessly be resistance to this movement. This suggested innovation proposes tying our bodies and activities closer to technology than perhaps they have ever been before.  At some point, concerns about how human society still is would begin to manifest. Those who do not wish to participate in the “technological evolution” could potentially face different treatment or opportunities as those who do. At the same time, however, I would argue that the use of assistive or enhancing technology represents a personal choice. We don’t infringe on personal freedoms to get tattoos, body piercings, or non-medically approved RFID implants, despite the fact that many of these represent a semi-permanent body modification. Similarly, the definition of human is not necessarily chiseled in stone. Some of the characteristic qualities discussed in lecture included: memory, culture, language, reason, questioning, measuring, representations, symbolic cognition, consciousness, empathy, appreciation of mortality, awe, beauty and inspiration. I might even go further to suggest that the practice of innovation and tool-making is a fundamental part of the human identity. Humans were not born with wings, and yet millions fly every day. This is certainly not the only barrier to a more widespread adoption of this technology, however. Military usage, usage by terror groups, and other unanticipated exploitation could certainly have serious consequences. It is for this reason that such a techno future could only be possible with careful though and enforcement of appropriate regulations.

Works Cited:

(1)    "The Cost of a New Limb Can Add up Over a Lifetime." Hospital for Special Surgery. N.p., n.d. Web. 07 May 2015. <http://www.hss.edu/newsroom_prosthetic-leg-cost-over-lifetime.asp#.VUv0mflVhBc>.

(2)    "The EV Conundrum: Uncertain Resale Value Complicates Li-ion Battery Market." Navigant Research The EV Conundrum Uncertain Resale Value Complicates Liion Battery Market Comments. N.p., 21 Jan. 2010. Web. 07 May 2015. <https://www.navigantresearch.com/blog/the-ev-conundrum-uncertain-resale-value-complicates-li-ion-battery-market>.