Pradeep S. Mehta and Sohom Banerjee |Trans-humanism: The Silent Capture Of The Human Mind

A young professional wakes up in the morning. Before touching water, before offering a prayer, before looking at the sky, he checks his phone which tells him what meeting comes first, what news deserves his fear, what food may improve his health, what music may improve his mood, and what advertisement may match his hidden desire. He still believes he is free. But slowly, quietly, the first decisions of his day have already been outsourced.

This is the real debate behind the growing anxiety around trans-humanism, wearable devices, spatial computing, artificial intelligence and Big Tech. The issue is not whether Apple, Meta, Google or any other declares itself “transhumanist”. Most of them do not. The issue is more subtle and more serious. Technology is moving from the outside to the inside of human experience. It’s no longer only on our desks. It’s in our pockets, on our wrists, in our ears, before our eyes, inside our homes and increasingly around our emotions, behaviour and attention.

The old idea of transhumanism imagined a dramatic future: humans with chips in their brains, robotic limbs, artificial organs and machine-augmented intelligence. But the modern version may not arrive through surgery. It may arrive through comfort. It may arrive as a beautifully designed device, a health feature, a pair of earbuds, a watch, a headset, an assistant or a screen that understands your gestures, voice, your habits and eventually your intentions.

That’s why the debate shouldn’t be dismissed as a conspiracy. The extreme claim that users will immediately become “drones” or “robots” is exaggerated. The underlying fear isn’t irrational. Human autonomy doesn’t disappear in one dramatic moment. It weakens gradually.

First, we use technology for convenience. Then we depend on it for memory, direction, communication, entertainment, health tracking and decision-making. Finally, we reach a point where the human mind becomes uncomfortable without technological mediation.

This is the deeper civilisational risk. Big Tech is not merely building devices. It is building environments. It is building ecosystems that understand, predict and shape behaviour.

The human mind isn’t just another market. It’s the crucible of judgment, memory, emotion, imagination, conscience and freedom. When technology occupies this space, it’s not only about innovation. It’s a question of power. Who controls the interface between the individual and the world? Who owns the data?

Indian philosophical traditions understood the power of the mind long before modern technology companies tried to monetise it. In the Bhagavad Gita, Krishna tells Arjun that the mind can be the greatest friend when controlled and the greatest enemy when uncontrolled. Kurukshetra was not just a political or military battlefield; it was also psychological and spiritual. Arjun’s crisis was one of perception, emotion and judgement. Krishna doesn’t ask him to surrender his mind to an external system; but to awaken his consciousness, discipline his senses and act with clarity.

This is where the contrast becomes powerful. Yoga is about mastery over the self. Big Tech often creates dependency on the system. Yoga teaches control over senses. Digital platforms stimulate the senses continuously. Yoga disciplines desire. Consumer technology monetises desire. Yoga cultivates silence, concentration and inner awareness.

Real human enhancement, therefore, can’t be reduced to better devices. A human being isn’t enhanced merely because he can track his sleep, receive faster notifications, wear smarter glasses or outsource memory to artificial intelligence. A person is truly enhanced when he becomes more conscious, more disciplined, more compassionate, more independent in thought and more capable of acting with wisdom. If technology strengthens these qualities, it serves humanity. If it weakens them, it becomes a sophisticated form of mental colonisation.

The danger is not technology itself. Hearing aids, prosthetics, health monitors, accessibility tools and medical innovations can transform lives. A diabetic patient using a sensor, a disabled person using an advanced prosthetic limb, or an elderly person using fall-detection technology is not a victim of trans-humanism. These are examples of technology serving with dignity. The problem begins when technology moves from helping humans overcome limitations to capturing human attention, shaping behaviour and converting intimate life into data that can be monetised.

That’s why the ownership structure matters. If a handful of corporations control hardware, software, app ecosystems, payments, artificial intelligence, content distribution, health data and immersive interfaces, they become more than companies. They become gatekeepers of human experience. No democratic society should allow such concentrated power over the mind, body and behaviour of citizens without strict accountability.

The policy conclusion is clear. Governments should not ban innovation, but they must stop treating wearable, immersive and AI-driven technologies as ordinary consumer products. A new regulatory framework is needed for neuro-data, biometric data, emotional analytics, attention manipulation, algorithmic nudging and immersive digital environments. Privacy laws must move beyond consent forms, because no user can meaningfully understand the full consequences of continuous behavioural tracking. Data minimisation, purpose limitation, algorithmic audits and independent oversight must become mandatory.

There should also be strict rules preventing companies from using health, emotional or behavioural data for manipulative advertising or political influence. Children and young people need special protection from immersive and addictive technologies. Public institutions must invest in digital literacy that teaches not only how to use technology, but how to resist technological overdependence.

The way forward is not anti-technology. It is pro-human. Technology must remain a tool, not an invisible authority. It must expand human freedom, not replace human judgement. It must support consciousness, not capture it. In the language of the Gita, innovation must serve dharma.

If technology helps human beings become healthier, wiser and freer, it is progress. But if it makes them distracted, dependent, predictable and programmable, it is not human enhancement. It is the silent surrender of the human mind.

Pradeep S. Mehta is the secretary-general of CUTS International, a leading global public policy research and advocacy group. Sohom Banerjee is associated with Jaipuria Institute of Management, Noida.