(Justine Quart)

Can certain perfumes help Alzheimer’s patients recall memories? Could implanting a robotic eye help a blind man see? Berkeley journalist Kara Platoni explores these questions in her new book, “We Have the Technology: How Biohackers, Foodies, Physicians, and Scientists Are Transforming Human Perception, One Sense at a Time.” She joins us to talk about cutting-edge perceptual technology and what it means for our evolution.

Guests:
Kara Platoni, author of "We Have the Technology: How Biohackers, Foodies, Physicians, and Scientists are Transforming Human Perception, One Sense at a Time"

  • David E. Gabert

    I am not interested, thank you very much, in being a cyborg; I am totally human, with most of my parts, though I might qualify as a borg, I have both hips replaced, does that count? d

    • David E. Gabert

      Thank you for respecting my wish to be human and reading my e-mail;For other uses,
      see Cyborg (disambiguation). Part of a series on Cyborgs Cyborgology Bionics;Biomimicry Biomedical engineering
      Brain–computer interface; Cybernetics; Distributed cognition;Genetic engineering; Human ecosystem;Human enhancement;Intelligence amplification;Whole brain emulation;Theory Postgenderism;;Cyborg anthropology; Centers; Cyberpunk;;Cyberspace Politics Cognitive liberty;Extropianism;l; Morphological freedom; Singularitarianism;Techno-progressivism;Transhumanismv;t

      A cyborg (short for “cybernetic organism”) is a being with both organic andbiomechatronic body parts. The term was coined in 1960 by Manfred Clynes andNathan S. Kline.[1]

      The term cyborg is not the same thing as bionic, biorobot or android; it applies to an organism that has restored function or enhanced abilities due to the integration of some artificial component or technology that relies on some sort offeedback.[2][3. Funny, I thought if I had a “genetic growth of hips, I’d be sully human…the term needs to be more adequately defined….David E. Gabert, Attorney at Law Wikipedia

  • Robert Thomas

    Newton, Goethe and Wittgenstein all wrote perceptively and penetratingly on human color perception. The “opponent process” outlined in Goethe’s Theory of Colours (1810) – a tour de force of observational empiricism – has been shown to successfully describe some aspects of human vision, along with the more conventional tristimulous models.

    The appearance in Homo of a third and fourth color receptor, their subsequent loss and then another’s re-appearance in a different band is a fascinating part of human evolution; the adaptive changes in color perception through natural selection and the way in which creatures’ vision doesn’t comport with any obvious pre-ordained mathematical form has been among the discoveries that have dissuaded many thinkers from explanations of nature that require intelligent design.

  • Robert Thomas

    Some number of human beings appear to have a mutation producing a fourth color receptor (females are more likely to have this mutation, as two of the cone-cell pigment genes are on the X chromosome) but most of these mutations appear to be “non-functional”. True human tetrachromatic vision appears to exist but is exceedingly rare.. In Homo, the functional variety of this mutation would seem to allow a completely different experience of light spectra, not just an extension into near-infrared. The fourth receptor seems to have a sensitivity peak between red and green.

Sponsored by

Become a KQED sponsor