I have had this wondering since a long time now. I asked the same question from my science teacher when I was in my ninth grade in school. The answer, if I remember correct was - Yes, definitely we are. But you know, kid, its a very slow process. We, the homo sapiens sapiens, are the ongoing product of the continual process of variation, reproduction and natural selection which started millions of years ago.We may be evolving; non-biologically?!
However, I continue to meditate if we really are evolving. Biologically, evolution is defined as "change in the gene pool of a population from generation to generation by such processes as mutation, natural selection, and genetic drift". On this front, I take an equivocal stand; We may not be evolving biologically. On an orthogonal note, we may actually be devolving as we see an upsurge of genetically-prone diseases like diabetes, cancer; the deadly HIV etc. Increase in life expectancy has been exponential; no denials. But do you think its because of a "biological evolution" per se? I, however, do believe that what is really evolving is the environment around is. And technology is the principal vehicle on which we are barging ferociously into the future, may be faster than we should. Ray Kurzweil's statement here would appropriately summarise my stand. We as intelligent beings are making intelligence more intelligent. And I contend that this process is largely non-biological.
Technology is the principal vehicle.
Technology is powerful. Period. We create technology. We also have the ability to enable technology create (evolve) us. A thought-provoking one hour I witnessed today as I heard Kevin Warwick's story of being the First Cyborg (Cybernetic Organism; part human part machine) in the world - "Robots with Biological Brains and Humans with Part Machine Brains". According to his take on technology and evolution, exciting times are nearing us as we ready ourselves for being cyborgs. His research has introduced us to human implants of RFIDs; using technology as a capability-enhancer for blindness, alzheimer's disease etc. Most adrenalizing is the concept of technology to upgrade human capabilities. We are the evolved product of a process which continued (and still does?) for millions of years, but we are still stuck with a not-so-efficient nervous system (!), mortal biological cells (!!) and limited senses in terms of their number and quality of service (!!!).
Non-Biological Evolution is a choice.
One of the most exciting experiments of Kevin Warwick was putting his nervous system online on the internet, and controlling a robotic arm at a physically different place. This was achieved by a neural implant (fotograph of the chip implanted appears in the top left corner of this post) which communicates the biological nerve signals to provide input online to the robotic arm. Even communication between two biological beings (himself and his wife Irena) was successfully accompalished. A small arm movement by himself stimulated a similar movement in his wife's and vice versa. I was able to look further for a moment as he commented that times may be near when you might have the capability of having multiple personalities!And further these times may be inevitable, for who would want to remain a mere sub-species by being just a "human".
"Humanity can change itself but hopefully it will be an individual choice. Those who want to stay human can and those who want to evolve into something much more powerful with greater capabilities can. There is no way I want to stay a mere human." - Kevin Warwick
Are we prepared to evolve?
There are already concerns about the possible misuse of technology as a capability-upgrader, ethical issues around the same, and the rather dire consequences of mixing-mistake-with-driving whilst heading towards future. If you have read (or heard) Ray Kurzweil, you will understand how this research is a baby step towards the hypothesis - the singularity.
"And ultimately these computers will be in our bodies and brains...so it really is one civilization. I object to the word 'Transhumanism' because—or 'Posthumanism'—because it implies we’re going beyond humanity. I think this is the human—maybe 'Postbiological' ultimately—but it's a part of the human civilization. --Ray Kurzweil's response to a question regarding future competition between human- and artificial intelligence. Early 2005 Harvard conference [Source - Ray Kurzweil]
What striked me was Kevin's response to one of the audience question - "How do these sensations feel like?". The answer - 'it was a new sensation.It did not simulate itself in the form of a new smell or sight, rather the brain evolved over time to recognise it as a new sensation.' This implies that the response and training of a biological being to these new implants is highly personalised. As I collect myself and my thoughts about this exciting yet bloodcurdling possibility of future (and the response to the aforementioned question), I do want to pose a question to the researchers in cybernetics -
How much then is the reliability of such new implants? If the response (and well the stimulus too) is going to be so personalized, how then can we be sure that the enhanced capability is actually the enhanced capability that was desirable? If the probability of achieving something but the desired effects is non-zero, should we not re-think before its too late? It is important to think now as what is at stake is the "human"kind. How magnified (dire) will the error rates (if any) be?
I waited further to meet REEM-B, the first humanoid developed in Barcelona. REEM-B has accredited to itself some pretty sophisticated features. Here I made a video of the small presentation introducing REEM-B to the Barcelonites. This fella has been programmed to evolve (learn) over time. That's (baby) technology for you - useful, neat and smart.
3 comments:
I believe, the upsurge of cardiovascular diseases and even genetically transferred diseases like diabetes is mainly due to sudden change in our lifestyle. I read a book written by a doctor who had to undergo a severe heart surgery. He says that human body has slowly evolved over a long period. This body just cannot adapt to the changed,lethargic modern lifestyle. In the last 50 years or so, humans have greatly reduced their physiological activities which they have been doing since so long. The modern lifestyle is of course the result of our own technological innovations. It's like creating problems first and then trying to find solutions. :)
I agree that environment around us is evolving very fast. However nature has its own rules. For me, it's much more sensible to be in sync with nature rather than trying to invade it.
You have a point. But technology just offers us a choice. And all on us how to exercise that choice.
Increase in genetically transferred diseases and the like, sure I agree. Thats why I feel that we may actually be devolving biologically. But technology is not the culprit I believe. Nature has its own laws. Its also "natural" to head towards a better life. Cutting short on exercises, eating junk, choosing sedentary lifestyle, decreasing social interaction - is technology the culprit here? When the stone age man made his first tool - that was the beginning of technology and it was harmless. Hence, technology is an enabler - its quite harmless. Its humans who have made it harmful - by exercising the choice offered in a wrong way. Technology as an upgrader - thats controversial.
I completely understand what you've to say. I am not against technology. I am against its use without seeing pragmatism. We have often failed or rather neglected to see pragmatism. Also, widespread use of any technology without taking into account consequences makes it very very difficult to switch to better choices later. That's the sad part.
Anyway, I think, we agree on most of the points. :) If my previous comment created a wrong impression, I am sorry for that.
Post a Comment