Today while reading fictional stories about the ethical
implications of body modifications, I came across this passage about a man
“being kept alive by the very technologies whose spiritual purpose he had so
despised.”
How could his loved ones elect to replace a pulpy mess
with the mere fleshy simulacrum of a nose, when rhinoplastic alternatives are
available that will not only replace but upgrade the usual functioning of the
sense organ?
-taken from The Modification of Eugene Berenger, Gregory
Norminton/afterword Dr. Nihal Engin Vrana
I am all for speculative fiction. In fact, it was in part
the imaginative meanderings stimulated by such fictions that led me to
investigate the sense of smell in the first place, and mostly because its
future is so unforeseeable.
This 2013 collection, titled Bio-Punk: Stories from the Far Side of Research, even
takes the extra step to have scientists and ethicists write forewords for each
of the stories. But upon this particular idea, I must ask – How would we
upgrade such an organ? How would we modify not the cosmetic aspect but the
sensory function itself?
Being that we do not fully understand the way the
olfactory bulb converts aromatic molecules into meaningful electric signals,
such an upgrade sounds nice, but the details of its operation are currently
quite nebulous.
The only thing I can think of is to replace the
epithelium patch with a vastly larger and invaginated one, like that of a
dog’s. But immediately, I recall the adage of sensory psychologist and smell
expert Avery Gilbert: If humans still walked on all fours
sniffing each other’s butts, then we wouldn’t find dogs to be such exceptional
noses.
And then, on second thought I ask – Is this even an
improvement?
The trajectory of human development seems to be one of
losing our sense of smell, or at least not paying as much attention to it
anymore. In that case, an upgrade would be the wrong word. “Liberation from the
beastly reekings of your meatbody!” reads the sign outside the local body-mod
shop.