Institute for Ethics and Emerging Technologies

The IEET is a 501(c)3 non-profit, tax-exempt organization registered in the State of Connecticut in the United States. Please give as you are able, and help support our work for a brighter future.

Search the IEET
Subscribe and Contribute to:

Technoprogressive? BioConservative? Huh?
Quick overview of biopolitical points of view

whats new at ieet

The Emperor Has No Clothes: Socrates Deconstructs Singularity University

The Future of News? Virtual Reality

Future Fiction: To an Antique Land

Could You Survive Nuclear Fallout?

Star Trek Philosophy: “Killing Is Wrong, No Matter Who’s Doing It”

What About Me?

ieet books

The Brain: The Story of You
David Eagleman


Giulio Prisco on 'The Emperor Has No Clothes: Socrates Deconstructs Singularity University' (Nov 30, 2015)

dobermanmac on 'The Emperor Has No Clothes: Socrates Deconstructs Singularity University' (Nov 30, 2015)

balom on 'Obfuscation: protect privacy by destroying the Web!' (Nov 29, 2015)

instamatic on 'Christians Should Support Scientists and Technologists' (Nov 28, 2015)

spud100 on 'Viewpoints on Modern Cosmism' (Nov 28, 2015)

spud100 on 'Christians Should Support Scientists and Technologists' (Nov 28, 2015)

Giulio Prisco on 'Viewpoints on Modern Cosmism' (Nov 28, 2015)

Subscribe to IEET News Lists

Daily News Feed

Longevity Dividend List

Catastrophic Risks List

Biopolitics of Popular Culture List

Technoprogressive List

Trans-Spirit List


Enframing the Flesh: Heidegger, Transhumanism, and the Body as “Standing Reserve”

Moral Enhancement and Political Realism

Intelligent Technologies and Lost Life

Hottest Articles of the Last Month

Why it matters that you realize you’re in a computer simulation
Nov 14, 2015
(68015) Hits
(14) Comments

The Future Business of Body Shops
Nov 15, 2015
(8081) Hits
(0) Comments

Crypto Enlightenment: A Social Theory of Blockchains
Nov 1, 2015
(7145) Hits
(0) Comments

Artificial Intelligence is Already Here—Artificial Consciousness is What Eludes Us - See more
Nov 19, 2015
(4143) Hits
(1) Comments

IEET > Rights > Disability > Life > Access > Enablement > Innovation > Implants > Health > Vision > Futurism > Fellows > Andy Miah

Print Email permalink (2) Comments (10303) Hits •  subscribe Share on facebook Stumble This submit to reddit submit to digg

Oscar Pistorius makes a ‘One Games’ Future more Likely

Andy Miah
By Andy Miah
M Blogs

Posted: Jul 15, 2012

Oscar Pistorius has made history by becoming the first athlete with a prosthetic device to take part in the Olympic Games.  What does this mean for the future of sport and society? Will Olympics and Paralympics soon merge?

Much of the debate has focused on whether he should be allowed to take part from the perspective of what’s fair for other athletes. Scientists have commented on whether his legs are doing something fundamentally different from biological limbs. Other critics have said it is political correctness gone mad that has led to him being allowed within the Olympic programme.

Each of these perspectives fails to see the bigger picture and the fact that the separation between Olympic and Paralympic athletes is an historical accident born out of a time with very different values and a failure to recognize the accomplishments of disabled people.

If the modern Olympic Games were invented today, there would be just one Games. No advanced democracy would accept the segregation that presently exists.

In part, this is why Pistorius is controversial. He is an outlier in the Paralympic community, unrivaled in his achievements and aspirations. Yet his values are more in keeping with the direction of Paralympic sport. While the Paralympic Games may have begun as a social movement, the mission of which was partly to promote the capabilities of people with disabilities, it is today an elite athletic population, held to the same standards of so-called able-bodied athletes.

Recently, the CEO of the IPC, Philip Craven, indicated that it was not inconceivable that the two Games become one at some point in the future and this speaks volumes to how the tables are turning.

Today’s Olympic gold medal winner may be tomorrow’s Paralympian, as the rise of technological enhancements means that prosthetics can overtake the capacities of biological body parts and what we consider today to be optimal may, tomorrow, seem inefficient. This matters considerably in sports as so many promising athletes have their careers brought to an end by injury, a testimony to our biology’s limited capacity to withstand a career in elite sport without technological support.

What’s more, these future athletes need not be the kind of clunky prosthetic devices that resembles Pistorius’ blades. Rather, athletes – and people more generally – may have their bodies infused with nanobots that make our bodies more resistant to stress and more capable of repair and enhancement.

Yet, there is a further argument to support this direction, which is that the Olympic Games is not just about performance, it is about social change and nobody more than Pistorius represents the changes that are taking place around human enhancement technologies. He represents the dramatic changes to our concept of what it means to be able-bodied.

I suspect in 30 years from now, more people will tune in to the ‘Enhanced Olympics’ than the present-day version, not least because more people will identify with these kinds of people.

Professor Andy Miah, PhD (@andymiah), is Chair in Science Communication & Digital Media, in the School of Environment & Life Sciences, University of Salford, Manchester. He is also Global Director for the Centre for Policy and Emerging Technologies, Fellow of the Institute for Ethics and Emerging Technologies, USA and Fellow at FACT, the Foundation for Art and Creative Technology, UK. He is currently part of a European Commission project called Digital Futures 2050 and of the Ministerial Advisory Group on Digital Participation in the Scottish Government.
Print Email permalink (2) Comments (10304) Hits •  subscribe Share on facebook Stumble This submit to reddit submit to digg


While we’re at it, let’s get rid of the division between male and female athletes. Now that I say that, I don’t like the idea. What would I do with so many fewer female athletes. If we’re going to talk about a ‘one games’, we might as well talk about merging the male and female games. I’m still not liking the idea of fewer female athletes.

(I tried to comment before but I didn’t see it show up so I’ll try again. Let’s hope I’m not repeating myself.)

What happens when people with intact bodies begin to use enhanced limbs simply as a means to improve performance?

How can flippers still be disallowed in swimming?

Why couldn’t a weightlifter use a mechanized exo-skeleton?

A pole vaulter with arm extensions to provide additional leverage?

The concept seems very flawed and full of contradictions.

YOUR COMMENT (IEET's comment policy)

Login or Register to post a comment.

Next entry: Spacesteading – May the Meek Inhabit the Cosmos

Previous entry: Which Nation Has the Best ‘Technik’?


RSSIEET Blog | email list | newsletter |
The IEET is a 501(c)3 non-profit, tax-exempt organization registered in the State of Connecticut in the United States.

East Coast Contact: Executive Director, Dr. James J. Hughes,
56 Daleville School Rd., Willington CT 06279 USA 
Email: director @     phone: 860-428-1837

West Coast Contact: Managing Director, Hank Pellissier
425 Moraga Avenue, Piedmont, CA 94611
Email: hank @