Humans Might Be Technology
- Alex Gountras
- Apr 14, 2017
- 4 min read

As living, breathing animals, humans have evolved to a point where our intelligence allows us not only to survive, but to thrive among all other species. Unlike creatures with sharp claws, impenetrable shells, or natural camouflage, we lack strong physical defenses. By comparison, we are fragile. And yet, this very vulnerability has forced us to rely on something far more powerful: our minds.
It is our intelligence—our ability to adapt, to manipulate the environment, and to imagine possibilities—that has enabled us to flourish. Where nature limits us, our creativity and cognition create workarounds. We build shelter to withstand weather, tools to amplify our strength, and systems to extend our reach. In doing so, we construct environments that make our survival not only possible, but comfortable.

Because of our advanced cognitive abilities, we use metaphor as a bridge between the physical world and the technologies we create. We design digital systems in ways that feel familiar to us, even when the underlying mechanics are entirely different. The computer “desktop” is not really a desk, but it mirrors one to help us organize and navigate information. The digital “trashcan” doesn’t actually destroy matter, but it borrows from our physical experience of throwing something away. In doing this, we are not just building tools—we are constructing environments that reflect and extend the human condition. Technology becomes legible because it resonates with the metaphors we already know from our physical lives.
The further we advance along the path of cognitive evolution, the more sophisticated our metaphors—and, by extension, our inventions—become. Over the last century alone, we have not only imagined futuristic environments, but also begun to bring them into reality. Ideas first introduced through creative media—whether episodes of Star Trek or other works of fiction—serve as prototypes for our imagination, inspiring practical solutions and technological breakthroughs. These visions come to life when talent meets opportunity: as technology matures, skilled individuals can leverage platforms to execute ideas once confined to imagination. In this way, culture, cognition, and innovation form a continuous loop—our creativity informs technology, and technology, in turn, expands the horizons of our creativity.
At the core of this cycle is a fundamental truth: humans are driven by survival. Much of our behavior, even in advanced societies, is guided by instincts honed through evolution, promoting not just the survival of our species, but of our own genetics. This drive shapes the technologies we create—robots, androids, and other human-like machines are more than inventions; they are metaphors for ourselves, projections of our cognition and abilities. While they rarely mirror humans perfectly, they represent iterations of what might come as our intelligence and technology advance.
Our unique cognitive abilities give us the capacity to survive biologically, but also to extend survival through technological innovation. Just as evolution shaped our instincts, it now guides our creation of tools, systems, and machines that safeguard and enhance human life—ensuring our species thrives not only through reproduction, but through the inventions we bring into the world.
As our technology advances, so too will our metaphors. Eventually, these metaphors will become organic in nature. Energy systems may begin to harness natural energy directly. Motherboards could evolve into analogs of the human brain. Robots may develop personalities and behaviors that we perceive as genuine emotions. Cables might resemble veins, data could function like neural pathways, and the line between machine and organism will blur. Over time, it may become impossible to distinguish android from human.
At that point, when our technological creations have evolved to carry and propagate aspects of human cognition and genetics, it stands to reason that the human drive for survival and reproduction would extend through these new forms.
Once this transition—from android to organic, self-sustaining technology—is complete, humans would no longer need to control or monitor these systems. At this level of development, these entities could effectively become a new form of species: a version of genetic DNA capable of thriving, evolving, and reproducing independently. Humanity, through its intelligence and creativity, would have extended life beyond biology, creating an enduring legacy in a new medium.
Because resources on this planet are finite, the possibility of human extinction is inevitable. While this is a grim reality, it is also a call to action: how will our species respond when faced with such a scenario? History and evolution suggest that we will find ways to survive—whether on Earth or elsewhere. Just as instinct drives humans to fight for survival today, that same drive would likely shape our decisions in the face of planetary limits.
One possibility is that we would seek out another planet capable of supporting life, bringing with us our “DNA”—human or otherwise. At this stage, our organic technology could be so advanced that it surpasses the resilience of our biological selves, creating life forms engineered to survive and thrive where humans might not.
Could a planet like Earth have already been the host for such advanced “organic technology”? Could we ourselves be a form of it?
This line of thought intersects intriguingly with religious perspectives. Many belief systems hold that humans were created in the image of “God.” What if what we conceive as “God” were actually a designer from an original species, living on our original planet? In that scenario, science and spirituality converge beautifully: humanity, in its present form, might still reflect the intentions and intelligence of a creator—just not in the way we traditionally imagine.

All of this is possible, and what we often frame as black or white may in fact be a vast, nuanced gray. In that space, rigid scientific facts and religious beliefs need not be at odds but can intersect in ways that are both feasible and profoundly real.

















Comments