Disability And Progress: Relational Recoil From AI’s Silver Bullet.

By Sean Prenter,
Guest Contributor, Maxim Institute.

Have you ever broken a bone? Been laid up with the flu? That’s a glimpse into the daily reality for many disabled people. While temporary for you, this experience is permanent for the disabled. It shapes how people like me navigate the world.

The idea of a “cure” thus sounds tempting. Elon Musk’s Neuralink, for example, promises to “restore autonomy” and “unlock human potential.” Its recent trial helped Noland Arbaugh, a quadriplegic for eight years, control a computer with his mind. As someone living with a brain injury, I can’t deny the appeal—text-to-voice tools have already given me precious hours back in my week.

But these innovations prompt deeper questions: Who defines the problem? Who benefits from the solution?

Consider the cochlear implant. Governments redirected resources from Deaf schools to fund them, assuming they would solve everything. But many children with implants were left isolated in mainstream classrooms, especially when sign language and Deaf culture were neglected. “You may drive out nature with a pitchfork,” the Roman poet Horace warned, “yet she will hurry back.”

Advertisement - scroll to continue reading

Technology isn’t neutral. Philosopher Bernard Stiegler reminds us that while tech can open doors, it closes others. History proves this. Disabled Kiwis once lived in institutions like Cherry Farm and Kimberley. There medical interventions such as sterilisation and electroconvulsive therapy—considered “progressive” at the time—sought to reduce suffering by isolating people from society. They didn’t. Not until the 1980s did we recognise, by way of example, that while a Kiwi in a wheelchair may not have use of their legs, they are also disabled by the absence of mobility ramps.

A social understanding of disability is crucial as we face another wave of technological change with AI. When society moves fast, disabled people are often left behind—or worse, further marginalised. During the 2008 financial crisis, disabled people, already facing barriers to employment, were hit even harder by increasing job scarcity. And in the push for environmental sustainability, some physically disabled people have lost access to basic tools like plastic straws, which are stronger and more flexible, providing a safe medium for nutrition.

As AI reshapes everything from education to employment, we must ask: as others plug in, who will be left unplugged, left behind, or left out altogether? With lower incomes and less access to emerging tech, it’s unlikely our community will be the first to adopt or benefit from AI tools.

Now we’re not yet watching The Matrix in reverse with Agent Smith as the good guy urging us to plug in, and we may never be. But if we allow AI to replace relationships, we risk creating a future of further isolation, rather than inclusion. Our census already shows disabled children are over twice as likely to live in low-income households.

It’s not about how far AI will go but about who gets to come along. In our rush to improve the “me,” let’s not lose sight of the “we.”

*Maxim Institute is an independent think tank working to promote the dignity of every person in New Zealand by standing for freedom, justice, compassion, and hope.

© Scoop Media