Science-fiction come to life
As I scrolled down the page, “Cyborgs” was the only word that came to mind when I explored CEO Elon Musk’s website for “Neuralink,” a brain implant meant to bridge the gap between intention and ability (i.e., for patients who have paralysis, are deaf, blind, etc.). I reflected on films like “iRobot,” “Ender’s Game,” and “Creator,” all movies in which the lines of what it means to be human are blurred.
The top of the Neuralink webpage contains a demonstration of the process of teaching a recent chip implant recipient to control a computer mouse with their mind. According to the site, the purpose of the technology is to help individuals regain independence and improve lives.
On Jan. 29, Musk posted on X (formerly Twitter) that the first individual to receive his Neuralink implant was “recovering well” and that “initial results show promising neuron spike detection.” The potential restorative properties of this chip are exciting, and, seemingly, an incredibly positive endeavor attempted by an albeit somewhat ambiguous project. But what of the potential for individuals who have perfect control of their faculties and desire to become “chipped”?
In his article, “The forgotten Era of Brain,” John Horgan details an experiment conducted by a Jose Manuel Rodriguez Delgado in 1963, in which a bull’s charge was cut short by stimulating its caudate nucleus through the use of a handheld remote.
Delgado, rather cavalier in his experiments with electromagnetic pulses and brain implants, assumed the belief that one could and should manually manipulate one’s body. Horgan said, “Delgado … once wrote that humanity should shift its mission from the ancient dictum ‘Know thyself’ to ‘Construct thyself.’”
There’s quite a drastic divide between these two dictums. One encourages further understanding of ourselves and the other assumes that we as humans have the right to blatantly seek to reconstruct the image of God.
According to OpenMind, thousands of individuals in Sweden have received implants in their hands that are meant to “make their lives more convenient.” Storing e-tickets, swiping into a building and other menial tasks made more streamlined through the insertion of a chip right above the thumb. OpenMind raises questions of morality, safety and ethics regarding this often oversimplified and under-monitored device.
In regard to Musk’s chip, what are the implications of something like this malfunctioning? Would the manufacturers have the option to remotely take over an implant-recipients body? And how much privacy is the recipient given (going back to the implants seen in “Ender’s Game”)?
What’s imperative in this situation is transparency and accountability. I’m all for restoring sight, movement and hearing, all of which are things that, in a perfect world, are present in God’s creation. What I believe we as Christians cannot support or condone, however, is the pursuit of unnatural bodily enhancement. This pursuit inherently opens the door to a plethora of ethical ramifications and concerns. We are on the verge of experiencing a very concerning, even more technology-governed society that can be easily exploited by those who provide these enhancements.
Time will tell whether or not Musk chooses to restrict the uses of his Neuralink chip to purely medical and anthropological endeavors. In the meantime, I’ll sit tight, critically think through information as it’s released and firmly refuse any offer to make me a cyborg.
Glen is the social media & web manager for the Liberty Champion
