This week an Australian woman had some of her vision restored thanks to a retinal implant. Some transhumanists believe that as technology improves, people might replace their healthy retinas for implants if it meant gaining added functionality such as night vision. This is a guest post by Luke Robert Mason, director of Virtual Futures and advisor to Humanity Plus.

What if you could dramatically alter the way you choose to perceive the world? What if, like bats, you could use echolocation to navigate? Dramatically improve your ability to see in the dark like a cat? Be able to see ultraviolet light? Or perhaps have the ability of a butterfly -- to taste with your feet?

Transhumanists, a group who believe that augmentation of human capabilities is desirable, speculate that enhanced hearing and visual aids may soon enable us to customise our perception.


As mobile phones become increasingly ubiquitous, we are simultaneously wondering what will supersede these handheld communication devices and how new tools may alter the way we interact with the world around us.

Wearable technologies seem like a viable possibility, with projects such as Google Glass giving real traction to heads-up display (HUD). However, significant developments in perceptual aids for people with disabilities may offer a glimpse at an entirely different future for human-machine interfaces.

Read next Capitalism 2.0: the economy of the future will be powered by neural lace Capitalism 2.0: the economy of the future will be powered by neural lace

Cochlear implants, sometimes referred to as "bionic ears", are speech processors that allow the natural apparatus of hearing to be bypassed. These are currently used by over two hundred thousand people worldwide. Meanwhile, the US Department of Energy's (DOE's) Artificial Retina Project aims to develop a conceptually similar device that bypasses retinal photoreceptors, in order to send images from a camera directly to the visual regions of the brain as a way to restore vision to those who have been blinded by retina disease.

The capabilities of both these technologies, however, are still not as effective as the biological ears and eyes they aim to replace. Both are considered to be therapeutic forms of human enhancement -- an enhancement that provides the means of overcoming a perceived disability. We will see a number of therapeutic enhancements on display over the duration of London's 2012 Paralympic games. But what if these enhancements were able to take a person to a state of "improved" or "elevated" ability?


Oscar "Blade Runner" Pistorius made headlines when he was almost banned from competing in the Olympic Games because his carbon-fibre prosthetics were considered an unfair advantage over able-bodied athletes. Despite high hopes, Pistorius' Olympic campaign came to an end when he finished last in the 400m semi-final. But what if he had gone ahead and won the 400m Gold? Would athletes start seeing prosthesis as a desirable addition to, or replacement for, parts of their own body?

American double amputee, athlete and model Aimee Mullins has often spoken about the "opportunity of adversity".

Mullins is able to select her height daily by being able to choose from a series of interchangeable synthetic legs that she can

Read next Forget Trump, Zoltan Istvan wants to be the 'anti-death' president Forget Trump, Zoltan Istvan wants to be the 'anti-death' president

'wear' in the same way someone would wear a pair of fashionable shoes. She has what transhumanist philosopher Max More would call morphological freedom -- the ability to alter her bodily form at will.


Neil Harbisson, a colour-blind artist, has decided to push this freedom one step further by creating his own bespoke form of synaesthesia. Synaesthesia is a neurological condition where the the stimulation of one sense triggers another -- a synaesthete, for example may perceive numbers as colours. In a similar way, Harbisson uses a device attached to his head which allows him to hear colour as a series of musical notes, thereby extending his perceptual capabilities. His work raises an important question about the sort of choices we may soon be able to make and the ways in which we can begin to manipulate our own sensorium.

In an increasingly networked and mediated environment we may choose perceptual augmentations that extend our ability to acquire and interpret a greater quantity (and quality) of information.

Augmented reality (AR) is already exploring different ways to overlay the visual senses with relevant location based data. But vision is proving to be a limited way to augment our perception -- with traditional AR relying on our ability to view the world through the screen of our smartphone device.

Some researchers are suggesting it may be possible to extend information acquisition to other senses. David Eagleman, Director of the Laboratory for Perception and Action at the Baylor College of Medicine, is exploring ways to expand our sensory world by feeding electrical signals into the brain. Eagleman notes how, as biological creatures, we are only able to perceive a small amount of electromagnetic radiation called "visible light". His work is currently exploring different ways to perceive the invisible parts of the world.

Read next It's time to consider restricting human breeding It's time to consider restricting human breeding

This convergence of plausible near-future technologies could give rise to people who are able to perceive a wide range of stimuli previously invisible or inaudible to humans. Many of these technologies remain speculative, but it is important to understand the slippage between today's tools for therapeutic human enhancement and how these may have impact on the design of future interfaces.

Some humans may want augmented perception, and some may not.

Perhaps this will follow the usual adoption life cycle we see today --from early adopter to laggard. If so, these enhancements could have the potential to become as desirable and ubiquitous as handheld mobile devices.


We do not yet know what forms of enhancement will be considered socially acceptable, but if any sensual augmentation does become normalised, those who decide not to augment their perceptual capabilities may become regarded as "disabled".

After all, how much better would an artificial retina need to be, and what sort of functionality would it need to afford, before you would decide to replace your own eye with one?

Image: Shutterstock