I am a cyborg. But that is really nothing new, nor is it predicated on my having a pouch hanging from my abdomen that collects my waste and provides a mechanism for me to dispose of it. I agree with those who argue that we are all cyborgs to some extent, and I tend to buy into Andy Clark’s argument that we are “natural-born cyborgs,” that we are wired to “exploit deep neural plasticity in order to become one with our best and most reliable tools. Minds like ours were made for mergers,” (Clark, Natural-Born Cyborgs). Besides wearing clothes and eye glasses and relying on a pen and paper to work out a long multiplication problem, I will even admit to feeling pained at being without my iPhone. I do feel like the web is an extension of my knowledge, that I know things that may not be in my brain currently yet are imminently accessible to me (if you are married, you might have the experience that you “know” things that are actually stored in your partner’s brain), and that social networks like Facebook create for me an “ambient awareness” of my friends’ lives.
But it wasn’t until I had ileostomy surgery that I really thought about what it means to be a cyborg. To question cyborgism is to question what it means to be human. On one level, having an ostomy challenges assumptions of humanness no more than having a prosthetic limb, or having a pacemaker. To the extent that we conceive of ourselves as being somewhere inside the head, one could imagine that a sense of selfhood and humanness could survive even in the case of prosthetic arms and legs and artificial organs, so long as the brain was intact. When considering a future of biotechnological implants, I think many of us feel most alarmed at the notion of implanting anything into our brains as opposed to other parts of our bodies – an implant into our brains might threaten our selfhood and change who we are.
Years ago, people with Crohn’s disease were treated with lobotomies. There was an idea that the disease was all in the brain, and that by removing some parts, the patient would be cured. It sounds horrendous, yet more recently our guts have been termed “the second brain,” a term coined by Dr. Michael D. Gershon, because it operates with considerable independence from our “primary” brain. The gut has its own nervous system, called the enteric nervous system. “The role of the enteric nervous system is to manage every aspect of digestion, from the esophagus to the stomach, small intestine and colon. The second brain, or little brain, accomplishes all that with the same tools as the big brain, a sophisticated nearly self-contained network of neural circuitry, neurotransmitters and proteins. The independence is a function of the enteric nervous system’s complexity,” (“The Other Brain Also Deals With Many Woes”, New York Times, 8/23/2005). In having an ileostomy, did I actually have a sort of lobotomy?
What fascinates me is how one or both of my brains – I still have a substantial portion of my enteric nervous system, i.e., esophagus, small intestine – did exhibit neural plasticity in incorporating my new technological device into my biological process. Following surgery, my output thickened, and within months my total awareness became sensitized to when to empty my pouch, even waking me up in the night when my pouch is full. I feel my stoma expand and contract, and at some level, I feel my pouch. It is a part of me, and my brain(s) had no trouble incorporating it.
Yet, as I have written in a previous post, for months following surgery, I had strange dreams in which I was a half-human, half-reptilian creature with a stoma like a large scaly hose, and a long dragon-like tail. The dreams were all very much in line with Kafka’s Metamorphosis, full of anxiety, self-loathing, and existential crisis. Even as my consciousness was expanding to incorporate my ostomy into my sense of self, my subconscious was was shouting not-me not-me not-me.
I wonder if this is the tension and struggle that accompanies each new merging between the biological and nonbiological. My ostomy is not the first technology to render me a cyborg, and it won’t be the last. As I become more cyborg, does the process of merging become less problematic? Andy Clark argues that to be human is to be cyborg, that humanity is inherently cyborg. Perhaps cyborg and human are insufficient terms for thinking about the ways we will imagine identity as our bodies continue to incorporate technologies that defy categorizations like man-made and natural, or biological and nonbiological.
But for now, if I think about degrees of humanness, there is no doubt for me that I feel more human with my cyborg ostomy technology than I did as the sickly, starving wraith I was before surgery.