This is a topic and a question that has been beaten to a bloody pulp on more than one occasion, but I feel the need to bring it all back up. As the title might suggest, the topic of this thread is concerning the ideal of fusing organic flesh with the coldness of steel, or more precisely, becoming a Cyborg. What are the benefits, and what are the negatives? How close is the possibility of achieving that "true vision" of an advanced Cyborg like from Ghost in the Shell? Are you for, or against the idea of Cyborgs? This is purely a discussion thread, so please don't use slander in debating another, if such a situation was to arise.

It really depends on how far you wish to push your own moral barrier, fusing man with metal in all senses is practical unless in becoming machine we would lose our sense of self and/or rationality. It would give the disfigured a second chance, the old the ability to do what they wish without relying on the assistance of others, and of course, if someone is part machine and a part breaks, then they simply get it repaired which is much more practical than waiting weeks, months, sometimes even years for an injury to heal.

A downside could be a lose of a person's sense of self as mentioned before, this would most likely only ever happen if the brain was replace with an artificial mind, in which case it would be like completely replacing the consciousness and leaving it a completely different person than it was before. If science is able to overcome that then the only problem would be the user's mental strength. We have all heard those stories of the kid who is extremely violent and video games are for fault, this, although the video games usually do act as an outlet, is caused by the person's mental immaturity. A game or movie's rating system is based on the average mental maturity of an age group, so if you want to watch an R rated movie, most people aren't mentally prepared for it, consciously or unconsciously until they have reached the age of 18. Some people may never be prepared or mature enough to handle having metal flesh and blood.

Another downside could be lack of nerves, I myself have never heard of "Ghost in the Shell" but I'm guessing that, like the mind unless science is able to replicate a nerve system then we will at risk. Leprosy as a disease, not only causes destruction of the skin, but also of the the nervous system, and before the cure was discovered a huge cause of death was not the disease itself, but that those afflicted would cause major harm to themselves, unintentional or not, and not feel it resulting in not being aware, or not being concerned until it was too late and they were killed by it.

Depending on how the mechanical portions of it is controlled then there is the problem of hacking, if the circuitry is connected directly to the brain, then it is exactly like a typical human body, but if it is connected to a chip then that chip may be hacked, and set to do something such as illegal acts against the owner's will.

But despite all these things morality would be the major aspect as I said initially. If we are nothing more than bits and pieces of metal are we really human? Being so we could theoretically live forever, and although that has its own upsides what will happen to things such as the population, will kids just cease to exist? Or will the Earth be completely over populated before it becomes an issue. If you have an intimate relationship with another person, will you be able to continue that without the use of physical contact, because what pleasure would you and/or your partner get from holding nothing but a chunk of metal that symbolizes a person in their arms. So it all depends on how far is someone as an individual willing to go for whatever reason they may have.

I realize that my post focused a bit to much on the negatives, of course with the things I mentioned previously, there are also upsides, less disease, less obesity, more people will be judged on their mind not their body because anyone could look like anything, a longer lifespan. Many good things can be applied to this being a cyborg too.

>>3 In short, Ghost in the Shell is basically a self discussion about half of the points you just made, in the format of an animated series. If it is still possible for humanity to maintain it's identity while within a body made of plastic or metal, and other such ideals. What I like specifically about your previous comment, not to say the rest of it is bad, because it isn't, is that you brought up the idea of hacking into another's chip/mind. That very specific crime is also one of the various themes that go on within Ghost in the Shell. I don't want to seem like I'm advertising a series, but I do recommend you look it up, as I'm sure you'll find it very entertaining and intriguing.

I don't have a problem with cyborgs. There are already mechanical limbs everywhere. Quite useful for those whom needs it. It can also be done on those who wants to and its similar in an aspect to plastic surgery.

What I don't like is the fact it needs maintenance and other needs bothersome. As you would need to change your whole life style and well once you mechanical you can only do a constant performance... Don't get me wrong its good. But that also means you body will never grow or change naturally. Nor will wounds heal and other. * people say: but I am only human!* with cyborg the saying would go * I am simply mechanical* Humans can do the impossible sometimes. Robots won't fight what its not design to do.

Its a new barrier we never reached before. The effects will then be completely unknown... + it depends on how far you turn robotical. If your brain is a machine you may be subject to more defects. You also place yourself at risk of dying. They can copy your mind into the machine or transfer it. Yet wouldn't that imply that you were dead and then a new one came? ( Your you is dead, its a new singularity with everything you know and are that replaces you.) And if its a copy then well its like a clone on a mechanical level.

>>5 To talk about that last section of your comment, I guess that really depends on one's view of the matter. If the large majority of humans were able to transfer their consciousness over into a younger, or perfectly built exact copy of their current self, through psychic means, how much of a difference is there? Whether it'd be with a mechanical body or a organic body, all the person is really doing is just placing their own consciousness into something else. So you wouldn't be dead necessarily, just more over abandoning your previous shell. If I have misinterpreted the current point of discussion, please let me know.

In a way yes. But what makes you think that the you in the new shell was the same consciousness ( the same you) as the previous one. In between the two stage your technically dead. And there's no way to prove that you are the very same. To the one that obtain the consciousness nothing happened, but again if its just a duplicate then your previous one died to give a gimmick.

Its very tricky since the end result is he his still there. He is still the same. But its like you replaced him. He will never know. You might never know. But it happened and its impossible to tell if its true or not.

The consciousness lives on for future generations and such. But you still die within this conception.

bump

Well the easiest way I can put it is.

If you have a broom, but a part gets broken. You replace everything but the handle. Later the handle breaks and you replace it.

Can you still say its the very same broom as the first one you used? Even if you copy every nicks and nacks and cracks?

>>9 You aren't the same person you were 4 seconds ago, let alone when you broke your arm.

You shed skin and you cells changes much more often than every second. You can't just point out that he's not the same person, because this already happens every day. There are acceptable degrees of change to people. What indication is there that a physical change like this would have unacceptable degrees of change mentally? Or personality-wise?

Your right. I just meant not every organs as the same value.

Not saying its bad or wrong. Just mean you need to be aware and be ready to actually do it.

Its not strapping metal to an arm or wire ring things to the brain or anything of the sort. At this level it might even end up with 2 of you. One organic the other mechanic. Worst case scenario you slowly die and are conscious as you see your other mechanical self coming to life. Yes people change, but it brings questions... Its a completely plausible scenario and realistic. Just is horrifying to think.

I love the idea of fusing, just stating that it has its risks. For limbs and organs no problems! Just know that the new body as its own rules and its ''man made'' Its only a question of time in the world. But anything made by us is to some extent vulnerable. Not perfect.

>>11 >Its a completely plausible scenario and realistic

To be frank, I don't think it is. Giving an arm intelligence so it can act realistically and similarly to a regular humans is not the same as giving it consciousness. I think it's realistic to assume there could be problems with it, don't get me wrong. But I don't think having two consciousnesses is one of them.

I see how it's more involved to have a new limb entirely mechanical rather than strapping metal to your arm. But, I do not see the jump to such a worst case. What basis do you have for that idea? Have there been similar things happening with people getting prosthetic limbs in the past?

anon your right I am just talking about protestic like brains or controlling organs. Sorry if I made it confusing.

>>13
Even then technically unless you put an AI into the organ then nothing would happen, you could program a heart to automatically beat and it would do nothing else till the day it ceased to have the mechanical ability to function. Similar to the computers we have today it won't do anything it isn't programmed to do. Now, when it comes to the brain that's a bit trickier, in order to replace that it would require us to figure out what makes us, us. The major thing that separates us from animals is a sense of self and individuality. Sure an ape or monkey may learn things we try to teach it, but never once has it asked a question. Why? Because it does not recognize that there is information outside of it's own knowledge base. Practically it's "I know all there is to know and no one else knows anything I don't know." So let's say we weren't able to copy that aspect of individuality. The most likely next step, short of copying the actual brain, would be to take periodic scans, or make the user take periodic tests to view his/her brain development and build an AI that would think the same way they would. Eg. You take a test with 3 questions Purple or Brown, you choose brown, Green or Orange, you choose green, Green or Brown, you choose green again. They then program that into the AI so when faced with a question of the color they like more, they will most certainly choose Green, and if Green is not an option then they view their resources to see if there were any other similar tests, if no then it may just choose A) the color closest to green or B) use an RNG to choose at random. However, in order to function this would have to be a self-teaching AI that could learn from the information it receives from the world, not from a Data Cable. Then you don't actually have the person, but a copy of the person. Unless we find the "thing" that makes us human, then there would be no replacing the brain. And although we may live longer when the brain dies we die, but maybe just a more prolonged life span is all we need.