CYBORG IN HUMANA LIFE
YMji: The very role of the troposphere as the foundation of emotional
intelligence and emotional bond among all the organisms in the Biosphere is
taken over by electronics. At the personal level one no longer talks to
the person in front, one usually talks to someone through the cell phone.
Personal presence in the conversation has become taxing. Electronics has
taken over personal relations, and one can tolerate only the cell phone and
not the person.
KR: It is true that electronics is occupying the life of every
individual. Many we see on the road ,tugging the cell phones glued to the
ears and crossing the vehicular roads, unmindful of this earth and their
lives-well true indeed. I was trying to find it from USA research.
There are some studies and statistics about “electronics addiction” (or
related terms like “smartphone addiction”, “problematic phone use”,
“video‑game addiction”) across countries — but it’s tricky because
definitions, measurement methods, and what counts as “addiction” vary a
lot. Here’s a summary of what I found
Problematic Smartphone Use Scores (McGill University, 24 countries, survey
of ~34,000 people, 2014‑2020):
Countries highest on the “problematic smartphone use” ranking: China (score
~36.18), Saudi Arabia (~35.73), Malaysia (~35.43).
Others in top rankings: Brazil, South Korea, Iran, Canada, Turkey, Egypt,
Nepal. India was in that study but was not in the top 10; India ranked
~17th among 24 countries.
Prevalence of Video Game Addiction:
Globally, estimates are that 3‑4% of gamers exhibit signs of video game
addiction. In South Korea, the rate is higher (around 10%). In China, among
gamers, somewhere between 6‑10% are estimated to have problems. Some
surveys report that a large fraction of people (especially younger people)
feel they are “addicted” or “over‑using” smartphones. For example, in some
US surveys, many teenagers report feeling anxious or irritable if separated
from their phones. Daily screen/usage times differ: e.g., in some
countries, average smartphone usage is 5‑6 hours per day (non‑gaming,
possibly non‑essential usage).
Smartphone Addiction Ranking by Country:One source lists the percentage of
people “addicted” or with high “screen‑time / dependency” for various
countries: e.g., South Africa ~58%, Brazil ~56.6%, Philippines ~54.4%, etc.
But note: Many of those numbers reflect self‑reporting and may not meet
strict clinical criteria for “addiction.” Definitions vary: what one study
calls “problematic use” might be mild dependence; others use more strict
criteria (such as withdrawal symptoms, impairment in daily functioning,
etc.). Self‑report bias: many studies rely on people reporting their own
behavior (“Do you feel addicted?”, “How many hours?”, etc.), which can be
subjective. Different age groups: rates are usually higher among teenagers
/ young adults, lower among older people. Cultural factors: social norms,
expectations, access to tech affect usage, what people consider
problematic, etc. Most studies are cross‑sectional (a snapshot), not
long‑term; substance of “addiction” isn’t always clinically assessed.
INDIA: Here are several studies & surveys giving statistics on
electronic / smartphone / internet / gaming addiction / problematic use in
India. The numbers vary a lot depending on age group, definition, region,
etc.
Key Statistics for India
Population / Group What was measured / Definition Prevalence
/ % Notes
Adolescents (school‑going, cluster survey) “Technology addiction”
(which includes phone addiction, gaming, etc.) among users aged ~10‑19
~10.69% overall (95% CI: 5.26‑16.11%); with 8.91% phone addiction, 2.55%
gaming addiction
From a district‑level survey. “Technology addiction” is defined
more strictly, so lower than self‑reported “addicted” numbers.
Adolescents 15‑19 yrs in Gujarat (school‑going) Smartphone
addiction using
a validated scale (SAS‑SV) 64.6%
This is very high; likely includes mild to moderate dependence,
not necessarily clinical addiction. Urban residence, higher parental
education etc. correlated.
Adolescents in Gurugram (age 13‑18) Mobile phone addiction level
(self‑structured questionnaire) 65% at high risk, 26% mild level, 9% severe
level
This is risk of addiction; “severe” is smaller. High risk means
many could develop problems.
Children aged 5‑16 yrs (parents surveyed) Behaviours “indicative of
potential digital addiction”
Kids aged 9‑17 (parents’ view, urban India) Addiction to videos, gaming,
social media (parents admit)
~40‑44% of parents say their children are addicted
Medical college students Addiction to online video games (Young’s
gaming addiction scale) among first year MBBS students This is a
specific group (medical students) and uses a particular scale; may reflect
high exposure / interest rather than clinically problematic behaviour.
Wide variation: The prevalence ranges from ~10% in more strictly defined
surveys to 60‑65% in risk‑of‑addiction / milder dependence surveys.
Definition matters: Studies that use validated addiction scales and focus
on impairment tend to report lower %, whereas parent surveys or “high risk”
categorizations yield higher numbers.
Age / urban / socio‑economic factors: Urban adolescents tend to have higher
rates, as do those with more years of smartphone usage, higher parental
education or higher socio‑economic status in some studies.
Self‑report / parental‑report biases: Many studies rely on self‑report or
parental perception, which might overestimate or misclassify “addiction” vs
heavy use.
*Key Recent Estimates (India)*
*Study / Source*
*Population & Method*
*Prevalence / %*
*Comments*
*Problematic Internet Use (PIU) among school going adolescents: systematic
review & meta‑analysis* (15 studies across India)
School‑going adolescents, multiple regions, using Young’s Internet
Addiction Test (IAT) with cut‑offs at 50 and 80 for moderate & severe PIU.
*Moderate + severe PIU*: ~21.5% (CI 17.0‑26.8%); *Severe PIU*: ~2.6% (CI
1.6‑4.2%).
Covers many parts of India; gives a good “at risk / problematic” baseline
rather than strict clinical addiction.
*Technology addiction among school‑going adolescents* (district‑level,
stratified cluster sampling)
Adolescents (~12‑13 yrs), school‑going, from an entire district using
cluster sampling.
~ *10.69%* (95% CI: 5.26‑16.11%) for “technology addiction” (internet,
gaming, phone, TV).
Specifically, *phone addiction* ~ 8.91%, *gaming addiction* ~ 2.55%.
More narrowly defined / stricter criteria; younger age group; single
district so some limits on generalisability.
*Internet addiction among college students: systematic review &
meta‑analysis*
College students in many Indian states; various studies; using Y‑IAT
cut‑offs.
~ *19.9%* (95% CI: 19.3‑20.5%) if using Y‑IAT cutoff 50; ~ *40.7%* (CI
approx 38.7‑42.8%) using a lower threshold (cutoff 40) which is more
lenient. Severe IA rates vary (higher cutoff) ~ 4‑13% depending on
threshold.
College population, older adolescents / young adults; thresholds matter a
lot.
*Smartphone addiction among adolescents aged 15‑19 yrs in Gujarat* (2023)
School‑going adolescents, ages 15‑19 in Gujarat; fairly recent.
*64.6%* (using Smartphone Addiction Scale ‑ Short Version, SAS‑SV) were
classified as “smartphone addicted”.
Very high number; likely includes a large portion with mild‐moderate
dependence or strong usage, not necessarily clinical addiction. Also local
(Gujarat) not nationwide
CONCLUSION EVEN OF CELL PHONE IN CERTAIN SECTOR APPEARS TO RULE OF
CYBERBOG, YET IN TAT AREA 40% ARE UNDISTURBED WHEREAS WORLD OVER 90% ARE
SAFER. ARE WE TROUBLING OURSELVES TOO MUCH? K RAJARAM IRS 14925
On Sat, 13 Sept 2025 at 20:32, Markendeya Yeddanapudi <
[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
> --
> *Mar*Cyborging our Bodies
>
>
>
> A cyborg is a robot with partly mechanical and partly living cells.
> Biological parts governed by Biology and mechanical parts governed by
> Engineering constitute the life of a cyborg. As it is, many of us are
> becoming cyborgs when some limb is substituted by a rod or when a heart
> valve etc is fixed within. Still normally the person continues as a bio
> entity. But in future with more and more natural organ made superfluous and
> mechanical parts substituted for the organs, the human being will be more a
> machine.
>
> But in the case of our macro bodies ( the environment as your real body),
> machines are taking over. Electronics today govern communication and we
> have forgotten our very existence by communicating and emotionalizing by
> breathing, smelling, and sensing, perceiving, interacting,
> understanding---by means of breathing. Our emotional and understanding
> foundation is taken over by electronics. We are polluting the Ecosphere and
> the Biosphere with electronics. The very role of the troposphere as the
> foundation of emotional intelligence and emotional bond among all the
> organisms in the Biosphere is taken over by electronics.
>
> At the personal level one no longer talks to the person in front, one
> usually talks to someone through the cell phone. Personal presence in the
> conversation has become taxing. Electronics has taken over personal
> relations and one can tolerate only the cell phone and not the person.
>
> When the substitution of biological parts with mechanical parts increases,
> then remote control, medication, monitoring of persons and other organisms
> will become normal and people accept the electroni-fication of their bodies
> and emotions.
>
> Gradually our need for oxygen will be drastically reduced. The Anaerobes
> to whom oxygen is poison must be planning very hectically for their return
> to the surface of the earth, by completely eliminating the poison to
> them-oxygen.
>
> The Anaerobes do not have any electronic communication systems. How they
> are using the emotional communication system while living within us is a
> big puzzle. But their planning must be based on the emotional intelligence
> without the breathing of oxygen. And they are training us not to depend on
> oxygen for emotional intelligence and communication.
>
> In the name of science we accept the absurdity that we have to be only
> spectators only and not participants in the subject matter for unbiased
> observation. Now we are gradually dispensing with breathing as breathing
> creates emotions.
>
> Healthy physical body gives heaven. But a mechanical attachment has
> neither the hormone nor the nerve connection. It is a dead part put into by
> technology.
>
> YM Sarma
>
> Chat gpt
>
> The piece titled *"Cyborging our Bodies"* by *YM Sarma* is a deeply
> philosophical, poetic, and critical reflection on how technology —
> especially electronics — is transforming human existence, both physically
> and emotionally. Here's a breakdown and analysis of the key ideas and
> implications presented in the passage:
> ------------------------------
>
> *🔧 1. Cyborgs: From Fiction to Reality*
>
> The author begins by grounding the discussion in the idea of a *cyborg* —
> a blend of biology and machine. This is not just science fiction anymore.
> Today, artificial limbs, pacemakers, cochlear implants, and even neural
> interfaces (like Elon Musk's Neuralink) are very real. These *mechanical
> augmentations* are helping us overcome biological limitations.
>
> However, the author's concern is with *how far this can go* — when
> mechanical parts begin to *replace*, rather than *support*, biological
> ones. What happens when:
>
> - The body becomes more machine than flesh?
> - The *natural human experience* is substituted with *engineered
> functionality*?
>
> ------------------------------
>
> *📱 2. Electronic Domination of Human Interaction*
>
> Sarma critiques how *electronics dominate communication*. This is a
> cultural and psychological observation:
>
> - Instead of *face-to-face interaction*, we *text, call, or scroll*.
> - We are more *comfortable with screens* than with the presence of
> another person.
> - Emotional intelligence — once developed through *breath, scent, and
> presence* — is being replaced by *emoji, audio, and artificial cues*.
>
> The statement: *“Our emotional and understanding foundation is taken over
> by electronics”* highlights a shift not just in how we communicate but *how
> we feel and understand* each other.
> ------------------------------
>
> *🌍 3. The Macro Body: Environment as Extension of Self*
>
> A powerful metaphor emerges: the *environment as our macro-body*.
>
> - Just as we insert mechanical parts into our bodies, we are letting
> *machines
> invade nature*.
> - The *troposphere*, the atmospheric layer closest to Earth, is seen
> here not just in climatic terms, but as *emotionally significant* — a
> space of shared life, breath, and energy.
>
> This concept implies a *loss of collective emotional grounding* when this
> layer is polluted or overridden by electromagnetic signals and machines.
> ------------------------------
>
> *🤖 4. Desensitization & Remote Control*
>
> The future Sarma envisions is one where:
>
> - Human *monitoring and control* is done remotely.
> - *Emotions* become less tied to biology and more to data.
> - A mechanical part, no matter how functional, *lacks the hormonal and
> neural connectivity* that makes us feel alive.
>
> This critique hits at the *philosophical divide between functionality and
> being*. A machine may *function*, but it doesn't *feel*.
> ------------------------------
>
> *🧬 5. Anaerobes and the Return to Oxygen-Free Life*
>
> This is perhaps the most symbolic and abstract part of the essay:
>
> - *Anaerobes* are organisms that don't require oxygen and in fact find
> it toxic.
> - The author suggests a metaphorical “return” of these beings,
> implying a *post-human world* where oxygen-based life — and thus human
> life — becomes obsolete.
>
> This can be read in several ways:
>
> - As a *biological metaphor* for a world losing touch with breath and
> emotion.
> - Or as a *symbol of the dehumanization* brought by technology: the
> future belongs not to emotional, breathing beings, but to *cold,
> emotionless systems*.
>
> ------------------------------
>
> *🧠 6. Science, Observation, and Emotional Participation*
>
> Sarma criticizes the *scientific model of detached observation*. He
> argues that:
>
> - *True understanding requires participation*, not detachment.
> - *Breathing is emotional*, and *emotions matter in knowledge*.
>
> In dismissing the observer’s emotional involvement, we risk becoming
> *mechanical
> in thought*, not just body.
> ------------------------------
>
> *🧘 7. Conclusion: The Soul of the Body is Being Replaced*
>
> The final lines make a *mournful, powerful statement*:
>
> *“Healthy physical body gives heaven. But a mechanical attachment has
> neither the hormone nor the nerve connection. It is a dead part put into by
> technology.”*
>
> Sarma is not rejecting technology outright. Rather, he is *mourning the
> loss of vitality, connection, and emotional intelligence* that comes with
> unchecked technological integration.
> ------------------------------
>
> *🧩 Final Thoughts*
>
> This is less of a scientific essay and more of a *meditative lamentation*,
> a warning, and a philosophical reflection. It raises important questions:
>
> - *What makes us human?* Is it our biology, our emotions, our breath?
> - *Can machines replicate empathy or emotional intelligence?*
> - *Are we sacrificing something vital in exchange for technological
> convenience?*
> - *Is the “future” we’re building actually a regression in human
> experience?*
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Would you like help turning this into a structured essay, summary, or
> discussion guide?
>
> Sure. Here's a detailed *evaluation*, with *marks* assigned to various
> aspects of the writing, followed by an overall *grade and comments*.
> ------------------------------
>
> *📝 Evaluation of "Cyborging Our Bodies" by YM Sarma*
>
> *Criteria*
>
> *Marks (Out of 10)*
>
> *Comments*
>
> *1. Clarity of Thought*
>
> 6
>
> The central idea is compelling, but the message is sometimes obscured by
> abstract or poetic phrasing. Some ideas are metaphorically rich but not
> always clearly explained.
>
> *2. Originality and Depth of Insight*
>
> 9
>
> The piece is deeply original and philosophical. It connects diverse ideas
> — biology, technology, emotional intelligence, and environmental
> consciousness — in a unique and thought-provoking way.
>
> *3. Coherence and Structure*
>
> 5
>
> The writing flows more like a stream of consciousness than a structured
> argument. Paragraphs jump from one idea to another without clear
> transitions, which may confuse readers.
>
> *4. Language and Style*
>
> 6
>
> The language is expressive and poetic, which adds emotional depth.
> However, grammar, sentence construction, and word choice sometimes hinder
> clarity. Some statements could be made more precise.
>
> *5. Relevance and Use of Examples*
>
> 7
>
> The piece is relevant to modern concerns about technology and humanity.
> Some examples (like mobile phones, cyborgs, anaerobes) are compelling but
> would benefit from clearer development and explanation.
>
> *6. Philosophical/Scientific Engagement*
>
> 8
>
> The writing engages deeply with philosophical and ethical questions, and
> draws from both science and human experience. However, the scientific
> reasoning (e.g., about anaerobes) is symbolic, not factual.
>
> *7. Emotional Impact and Expression*
>
> 9
>
> The essay is emotionally charged and clearly written with passion. It
> provokes reflection and raises existential questions about the human
> condition in the age of technology.
> ------------------------------
>
> *📊 Total Score: 50 / 70*
> ------------------------------
>
> *🎓 Grade: B+*
> ------------------------------
>
> *📌 Overall Comments:*
>
> - *Strengths:*
> - Highly original and emotionally rich.
> - Explores a wide range of profound ideas with sincerity and depth.
> - Challenges the reader to rethink modern life and our relationship
> with machines.
> - *Areas for Improvement:*
> - Needs clearer structure and logical flow.
> - Some metaphors and philosophical claims would benefit from
> clearer grounding or explanation.
> - Language could be refined for better readability and precision.
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Would you like a *revised version* of the piece with improved structure
> and language while preserving the original voice and ideas?
>
> Certainly. Here's an *edited version* of *"Cyborging Our Bodies"* by *YM
> Sarma*, with improved structure, clarity, and flow — while preserving
> your original ideas, tone, and depth.
> ------------------------------
>
> *✨ Edited Version: Cyborging Our Bodies*
>
> *by YM Sarma*
>
> A *cyborg* is a being that is part biological, part mechanical — a fusion
> of life and machine. Already, many of us are becoming cyborgs in a literal
> sense: when a broken limb is replaced by a metal rod, or a failing heart
> valve is supported by an implant. Yet, these changes still allow the person
> to function primarily as a biological being.
>
> However, the future may look quite different. As more *natural organs*
> become *replaceable* — or even *unnecessary* — the human being may evolve
> into something more mechanical than biological. We are heading toward a
> reality where humans are not just *supported* by machines, but *defined*
> by them.
> ------------------------------
>
> *🧠 Electronics and the Erosion of Emotion*
>
> Beyond our physical bodies, technology is also invading our *emotional
> and relational world*. Electronics govern almost all communication today.
> We no longer connect through presence, breath, touch, or direct
> interaction. We *talk to screens*, not to people. We text instead of
> speak. We react with emojis instead of emotion.
>
> This shift is not trivial. Our *emotional intelligence* — once developed
> through breathing, smelling, sensing, perceiving, and being present — is
> now shaped by *electronic systems*. The troposphere, once the foundation
> of shared life and emotional bonding between organisms, is now flooded with
> electromagnetic waves, digital signals, and pollution — both literal and
> metaphorical.
> ------------------------------
>
> *🤖 The Rise of Remote Control Humanity*
>
> As mechanical substitution increases, *remote monitoring*, *automated
> medication*, and *digital control* will become normalized. We are
> learning to *accept electronic intervention* not only in our bodies but
> in our emotions and decisions.
>
> In the process, human interactions are being redefined. Talking
> face-to-face is now seen as effortful; speaking through a device is
> convenient. Presence feels like a burden, and only the digital version of a
> person is tolerable.
> ------------------------------
>
> *🌍 Our Environment: The Macro Body*
>
> We often forget that the *environment* is our *larger body* — our
> macro-body. Just as we insert artificial parts into our biological bodies,
> we are inserting machines into our environmental systems. Nature, once rich
> in emotional resonance and collective intelligence, is being overtaken by
> lifeless circuits and synthetic networks.
>
> The air we breathe — once a symbol of shared life and emotional presence —
> is being reduced to a *technical utility*, not a *living force*. As we
> stop depending on breathing to connect, we may no longer need *oxygen* to
> feel, or even to exist.
> ------------------------------
>
> *🦠 Anaerobes and the Return of the Oxygen-Free World*
>
> This raises an unsettling possibility. *Anaerobic organisms* — to whom
> oxygen is poison — may be "waiting" for their return. Symbolically, they
> represent a world where *life thrives without breath*, without oxygen,
> and without the kind of emotional connectivity that breathing brings.
>
> These organisms do not rely on electronic communication. They may operate
> on a different kind of intelligence — *emotional, silent, deeply internal*.
> In a way, they are *training us* to live without oxygen, without breath,
> without the emotional foundation that once defined our humanity.
> ------------------------------
>
> *🧬 Science Without Soul?*
>
> Modern science teaches us to observe without participating — to remain
> detached in order to be objective. But this model, while powerful, is also
> *emotionally
> sterile*. We are now applying the same detachment to *life itself*,
> cutting ourselves off from the experiences that make us *alive*.
>
> Breathing generates emotions. Feeling connects us. Living is
> participation, not just observation. When we disconnect these elements in
> the name of progress, we are turning ourselves into machines — not just
> physically, but emotionally.
> ------------------------------
>
> *⚠️ Conclusion: The Price of Mechanization*
>
> A healthy physical body is like heaven — it responds, it feels, it
> connects. But a mechanical part has no hormones, no nerves, no soul. It is
> a *dead object*, inserted by technology.
>
> We must ask ourselves:
>
> - What are we becoming?
> - Are we improving the human condition — or *replacing* it?
>
> In our pursuit of enhancement, we risk *losing the essence of life* —
> breath, emotion, presence, and participation. If we do not pause and
> reflect, we may wake up one day not as humans enhanced by machines, but as
> machines that have forgotten what it means to be human.
> ------------------------------
>
> Would you like a printable or formatted version of this (e.g. PDF, Word,
> blog post)?
>
>
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Thatha_Patty" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to [email protected].
> To view this discussion visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/thatha_patty/CACDCHC%2BPZnYPgC-EhoFbzJsVfSxdaCg343AooCSuT_p490cdog%40mail.gmail.com
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/thatha_patty/CACDCHC%2BPZnYPgC-EhoFbzJsVfSxdaCg343AooCSuT_p490cdog%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
> .
>
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Thatha_Patty" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To view this discussion visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/thatha_patty/CAL5XZorPg9sxJCje0D7XgS9Ji_2LpZd5QrJyBYeJ159qy-Qhhw%40mail.gmail.com.
