Human Transformation: Self, Free Will, and Identity
This essay examines three texts—Lauren Slater's "Who Holds the Clicker?" (2005), Susan Blackmore's "Strange Creatures" from The Meme Machine (2003), and Alain De Botton's "On Habit" from The Art of Travel (2004)—as a lens through which to interrogate the nature of the self. Slater's account of brain implants raises ethical questions about control and autonomy; Blackmore's memetics framework challenges the very existence of an independent self; and De Botton's reflections on travel and habit suggest that genuine self-awareness is both possible and essential. Together, the three pieces prompt a sustained inquiry into whether humans exercise genuine free will or are governed by forces beyond their conscious control.
- Introduction: Three Perspectives on the Self: Three texts challenge the concept of human selfhood
- Slater and the Ethics of Brain Implants: Brain implants raise questions about autonomy and control
- Blackmore's Memetics and the Illusion of Self: Meme theory denies the existence of an independent self
- Memes, Imitation, and Human Identity: Imitation propagates memes, erasing individual agency
- De Botton on Habit, Travel, and Receptivity: Receptivity and mindset define meaningful human experience
- Conclusion: Control, Purpose, and the Human Soul: All three authors together question human agency and purpose
✍️ How to write this paper — guide & tools ▾
What makes this paper effective
- The paper draws a coherent comparative thread across three very different texts—journalism, evolutionary science, and travel writing—unifying them around a single philosophical question about selfhood and free will.
- The essay moves from the most concrete (brain implants) to the most abstract (memes) and then to the personal (habit and travel), creating a natural escalation that keeps the reader engaged.
- The thesis—that humans' very impulse to challenge the idea of having no soul is itself evidence that a self exists—is both original and intellectually honest about its limits.
Key academic technique demonstrated
The paper uses comparative synthesis effectively: rather than summarizing each source in isolation, it places them in dialogue with one another, asking how each author's position complicates or illuminates the others. The use of a direct quotation from De Botton, followed by close reading, is a strong model of textual evidence integration.
Structure breakdown
The essay opens with a multi-source introduction and a clear thesis, then devotes one extended section each to Slater and Blackmore before turning to De Botton. A bridging paragraph links Blackmore's denial of selfhood back to Slater's brain-implant scenario. The conclusion revisits all three authors in sequence, restating their stakes and arriving at a qualified but affirmative claim about human agency and purpose.
Introduction: Three Perspectives on the Self
Lauren Slater's (2005) article "Who Holds the Clicker?," Susan Blackmore's excerpt "Strange Creatures"—taken from her book The Meme Machine—and Alain De Botton's chapter "On Habit" from his book The Art of Travel are very different pieces that all challenge the idea of the self in humankind. Is there a self? Or are we all controlled by forces outside our control? While science may be able to find ways of changing or enhancing our bodies, and though there may be some truth in the idea that our genes do not allow us complete free will over ourselves, we cannot deny that most humans believe there is something inside each and every one of us that gives us a purpose on this earth. Whether manipulated by a remote-control clicker or partially governed by memes, the fact that we are able to challenge—and that as humans we feel the need to challenge—the idea that we have no souls seems to point to the fact that indeed we do.
Slater and the Ethics of Brain Implants
In Lauren Slater's (2005) article "Who Holds the Clicker?," she examines brain implants and the hope of neuroscientists to treat mental illness with them. While this may sound like a plot element in a science fiction film, brain implants have been successfully implanted into psychiatric patients, and the hope is that more and more people will be treated this way in the future. In her article, Slater likens these brain implants to pacemakers, which were introduced in the 1950s. Back then, pacemakers were controversial—seen as a device that interfered with the soul, or perhaps even with God's plan. Today, however, pacemakers are quite common and their usage is anything but controversial. Slater suggests that brain implants may one day be viewed in the same light.
The key difference between pacemakers and brain implants, however, is that someone is actively controlling—manipulating, if you will—the mechanism. In the case of patient Mario Della Grotta, two doctors hold the clicker. These doctors can, in essence, control how happy or how sad Mario feels, and virtually every emotion in between. Ideally they aim for a balance—somewhere in the middle, where Mario will no longer be plagued by his obsessive-compulsive tendencies, which led him to seek treatment after exhausting every other route, including medication and behavioral therapy. But what does it mean for us as human beings when we can be controlled by what is, for all intents and purposes, a remote control?
There is much controversy surrounding this kind of enhancement. Some may see it as the way of the future or simply another step in our evolution; others view brain implants as transforming people into robots. When have we gone too far? And if someone is holding the clicker, what is to stop that person from using it to control another individual's mind for nefarious reasons? It is not unreasonable to think that whoever holds the clicker might abuse that power. The answer is that nothing, in principle, prevents it.
References
Blackmore, S. (2003). Strange creatures. Extract from The meme machine. Retrieved 8 December 2011, from http://www.susanblackmore.co.uk/Books/Meme%20Machine/Chapter%201.htm
De Botton, A. (2004). On habit. In The art of travel. Vintage.
Slater, L. (2005). Who holds the clicker? Mother Jones. Retrieved 8 December 2011, from http://motherjones.com/politics/2005/11/who-holds-clicker?page=1
Create your account
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.