Ranthosh MAHALINGAM

Critical Reading on Cyborg

Work presented to
Philip Alexander Steiner
Introduction to Legal Studies II
LAWS 1002
Groupe A
University of Carleton
Department of Law and Legal Studies
9 November 2023
This article talks about the consequence of the emergence of the technologies that keeps

evolving throughout the years. The commentary starts with the statement that police officer

cannot search someone cell phone without a warrant. The reason for this is that they now

see a mobile as an extent of yourself because it has become an omnipresent and persistent

element of everyday existence. This brings out the question related to the term of cyborg.

This term was used in the past as a reference of a human enhanced with artificial parts for

space travels, but now, it is being used as a relationship with technologies. This referee to

the deep and complex connection that humans have with technology in everyday life. This

brings two points of view in the world. Some people are like Donna Haraway where they

think that cyborg is an evolution of human-tool interaction. Others are like Ray Kurzweil

where they think that the line between humans and machine will not exist anymore.

Therfore, as technology increasingly merges with our human capabilities, we're facing

complex questions about identity, personal space, and freedom that could reshape the rules

and morals we've always known. As technology increasingly becomes part of our physical

selves, we're facing challenging questions about how to safeguard individual rights,

privacy, and security, highlighting the urgent need for our legal systems to evolve and

address these new realities. One of the principals for juvenile cyborg is the data generation.

The first principal says that third party that have access to the technology that cyborg put in

themselves should not be disclosed to other people without their consent. The second

principal is about the data collection. With the advance of technology, the device that they

use can be used for a kind of surveillance. For example, the google glass which allow us to

record or even take picture of something or someone without them knowing. Therefore, this
could be advantageous to the government to have a kind of monitoring on every citizen.

The third principal is constructive integration.

As we can see in the article, the core themes, or issues this emerging ‘body of law’ must

grapple with is the limitation of the technology that can be put in the someone. What I

mean by this is that there should be rules about what can put in their body and what they

can’t. For example, any kind of recording device should be placed in their body. For the

sole reason that if they are in a room full of people, they could record them without their

permission which will break the privacy. Another challenge of this is to know what is part

of the body and what is not.