Yeah there should be more differences in the way people look and not just clothing,hairstyle but height,age,body size,scars just stuff that make it feel like america and the future because not everyone will have the same body type.
It would actually make sense to have a lot of fat people I think lol I hope there's heaps of crazy fast food places
I assume that you mean in relationship to CP2077? Because being disabled is neither a social construct or due to society not being designed to take care of such people. Its a way to classify people that are in a state of where they are unable to take care of themselves or where its reduced, most people are disabled one way or another, some disabilities are just so minor that they are not considered a huge problem. But whether or not a society is designed for wheelchairs or blind people they will still be classified as being disabled. In the end at least as I see it, its about survival and you need neither a society or a social construct for someone to be disabled. If you lived in the wild by yourself and were born blind its a handicap in comparison to a person not born with any disabilities.
Its the same with animals should a dog for instant be born or loose a leg, its considered disabled in our eyes regardless of society (human society as a pet or in nature). Its purely a way to classify something like you would anything else.
Couldn't help notice this statement, it seems very wrong to make such comparison?
I don't think aliens in such case would look at humans as being disabled, rather than poorly adapted to their environment. It would be the same as us looking at a fish on land, jumping around and unable to move like we do and then conclude that it must be handicapped. I doubt anyone would draw such conclusion. Also them seeing us as not being productive seems wrong as well, if we look at ants and what they are doing it looks very primitive, but I dont think anyone would say that they are not doing anything productive. Was that really something that was written in a serious book as examples?
Last edited:
Isn't this a double standard? Both these statement seem to contradict one another.
I will agree with you that most people are disabled in one way or another, it's just that certain disabilities are so normalized that we don't even notice them. That's called privilege.
I remember when I went to college, the city I moved to had auditory signals for when it was ok to cross the street. Normally all you have is lights letting pedestrians know that it's safe. When I first moved there I didn't realize that the sound was to let people with visual impairments know that it was ok to cross. Now I live in New York City and we don't have that, so NYC isn't the best place to move to if you're blind, because the way that it's designed doesn't take into consideration the needs of blind people. So, is that not a socially constructed disability?
The way that this is relevant to CP2077, is say, you need a neural implant in order to interface with a certain elevator. That cuts off access to a person without neural implants in the same way that a building without a ramp doesn't allow a person with a wheelchair to enter. There's nothing natural about these things, hence, it's a social construct. Being blind, or deaf, or autistic, doesn't render you unable to take care of yourself, as you say, the way that society is built does. So in a Cyberpunk world where everyone is expected to have cybernetic enhancements a person that we would consider 'normal' today would not be normal there.
IMO a disability is when you have reduced function compared to the "healthy" members of your race, who are undamaged instantiations of your genetic template. It's true that in a world of cyborgs, an unmodified person would be disadvantaged, but not disabled.
If we genetically engineered the entire species to have an IQ of 200+ and someone was born with an IQ of 100 they would be disabled, because we have changed the very definition of human. Now, what if you genetically engineered only your child to have 4 arms, and they lost 2 of them in an accident.. are they now disabled? I suppose not, because you have to genetically engineer the entire species to alter the defenition of normal. You can't do that with augmentations, they are not part of our biological defenition.
The implication is that, if having 4 arms and losing 2 doesn't make you a disabled member of your race.. then perhaps by definition you are not a member of that race, you are a disabled member of your own race, of which you are a single member... Haha it's too early for this shit
If we genetically engineered the entire species to have an IQ of 200+ and someone was born with an IQ of 100 they would be disabled, because we have changed the very definition of human. Now, what if you genetically engineered only your child to have 4 arms, and they lost 2 of them in an accident.. are they now disabled? I suppose not, because you have to genetically engineer the entire species to alter the defenition of normal. You can't do that with augmentations, they are not part of our biological defenition.
The implication is that, if having 4 arms and losing 2 doesn't make you a disabled member of your race.. then perhaps by definition you are not a member of that race, you are a disabled member of your own race, of which you are a single member... Haha it's too early for this shit
I might have explained it bad
But I don't think its double standard. Because a dog with 3 legs is clearly disabled in our eyes, even though its another species. The reason we can make that assumption, is because we can compare it with other dogs and see that the majority have 4 legs and are more agile etc. So its through the comparison of individuals that we can figure it out. And aliens would be able to do the same should they see several humans. But if all humans that came to their planet were behaving like a fish would on land, meaning despite not being disabled weren't able to move as the aliens would. I think it would be logic that they would reach the conclusion that its a matter of environment rather than all humans being disabled.Regarding the last thing you mentioned, my point were simply that being disabled is not something that we as humans have invented and is born of society or a social construct, I think that from natures side we would be aware of it. So the blind person wanting to cross the street is already disabled. That auditory signals ain't added and would obviously help the blind person a lot in this specific situation would be good. But calling it a "social constructed disability" im not really sure is correct, because I honestly think that it would be near impossible to design a society so it took into account all the disabilities that exists. Its obviously extremely inconvenient and more could be done, but maybe its just the word "constructed" which makes it sound like, its something that is done on purpose or without thinking about people with disabilities.
So just to clarify, I think more could be done, but maybe use another word than "social constructed disability", unless its actually called that, as im not english so might simply be me, misunderstanding its meaning
Last edited:
Using IQ is not really a good example, I think when talking about disability. For several reasons, first of all its a made up measurement of human intelligence. But who decide what intelligence is? Because you could argue that Einstein is very intelligent, probably not a lot that would doubt that
But if intelligence is the ability to survive, then he might not be the best choice. So it sort of depends on how or what you believe intelligence is, I think.The person with the highest ever estimated IQ from what I could figure out is, William James Sidis who were estimated to have an IQ between 250 to 300, whereas the average person is around 100 as far as I know, but I doubt that he would look at us normal people as being disabled.
Obviously introducing fictive scenarios like adding extra arms to a person, greatly complicate this
But assuming it were done and someone with 4 arms lost two of them, it would depend on whether this individual would be able to still function optimal compared to having 4 arms. Lets say he were a swimmer and were really depending on having 4 arms, suddenly loosing two would definitely make him a worse swimmer, so it would be a work related disability in that regards. But if it had no impact whatsoever on the rest of his way of living, It probably wouldn't.You would still be part of that species, number of arms doesn't define what is human or not. Otherwise it would work the same were it the other way around and every human with only one leg or arm would no longer be considered human either, which is not the case either.
Last edited:
I've learned a bit more about impairments and disability since making the other posts, as a person here in the thread were kind to make me aware that I had the concepts of impairment and disability a bit muddled up and therefore misunderstood several things that people wrote. I know it is an important topic and I hope I didn't cause any offence, that wasn't my intention at all.
So just want to say that I can now see, that how disabled a person is depends on the barriers they encounter, and that the barriers they encounter can often be put there by other people through their attitudes or their design choices. And therefore it should be interesting to see how the world being created for the game affects both of those things!
Again thanks a lot to the person that made me aware of this. Its very much appreciated.
So just want to say that I can now see, that how disabled a person is depends on the barriers they encounter, and that the barriers they encounter can often be put there by other people through their attitudes or their design choices. And therefore it should be interesting to see how the world being created for the game affects both of those things!
Again thanks a lot to the person that made me aware of this. Its very much appreciated.
It's not like those physical barriers are put out on purpose.
Most things are designed with the concepts of utility (for the greatest number of people), space (volume), and costs (in terms of money and effort) required. YES they're inconvenient (or nearly impossible) for a minority of people. But until your society gets wealthy enough (in terms of money and available labor) to be able to do something about such things ... well ... there's a reason the polite term (not the PC one) is "handicapped".
Most things are designed with the concepts of utility (for the greatest number of people), space (volume), and costs (in terms of money and effort) required. YES they're inconvenient (or nearly impossible) for a minority of people. But until your society gets wealthy enough (in terms of money and available labor) to be able to do something about such things ... well ... there's a reason the polite term (not the PC one) is "handicapped".
Last edited:
I do agree that a "normal person" (today) would not be a "normal" person in 2077 because of the ubiquity of augments & such, but how many specific implants would be universal? I could see a bunch of devices, like an elevator, giving advanced options or a better control scheme to someone with a neural implant, but very few actually requiring them. I say very few because I could see the case where an elevator that is only intended to be used by internal employees of a company requiring a specific device/protocol to control it as a form of security.
Using today as an example, smart phones are no longer new technology yet not only is the market highly divided between different types with different capabilities and integration methods, there are still a good number of people who haven't and aren't likely to adopt them. Consequently, we see a lot of cash registers that allow for some sort of mobile payment, but don't typically see ones that require it.
I've heard on-an-off over the years (several times) we're going to become a cashless, paperless society, odd how it never seems to happen.
Even in a world like CP2077 you'll have fire stairs in buildings, mechanical locks, paper, and yes ... cold hard cash. Not like the black market wants to leave a transaction trail purely electronic currency entails.
Even in a world like CP2077 you'll have fire stairs in buildings, mechanical locks, paper, and yes ... cold hard cash. Not like the black market wants to leave a transaction trail purely electronic currency entails.
No, no, no, no, NO. Remember your Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy:
SIRIUS CYBERNETICS CORPORATION
Elevators: Modern elevators are strange and complex entities. The ancient electric winch and "maximum-capacity-eight-persons" jobs bear as much relation to a Sirius Cybernetics Corporation Happy Vertical People Transporter as a packet of mixed nuts does to the entire west wing of the Sirian State Mental Hospital.
This is because they operate on the curious principle of "defocused temporal perception." In other words they have the capacity to see dimly into the immediate future, which enables the elevator to be on the right floor to pick you up even before you knew you wanted it, thus eliminating all the tedious chatting, relaxing and making friends that people were previously forced to do while waiting for elevators.
Not unnaturally, many elevators imbued with intelligence and precognition became terribly frustrated with the mindless business of going up and down, up and down, experimented briefly with the notion of going sideways, as a sort of existential protest demanded participation in the decision-making process and finally took to squatting in basements sulking.
An impoverished hitchhiker visiting any planets in the Sirius star system these days can pick up easy money working as a counselor for neurotic elevators.
With the rise of cryptocurrency I could envision a future where 'criminals' have their own currency outside of normal channels.
I would also expect a certain amount of bartering to be taking place, especially with nomads.
I appreciate the concern, but no worries I've got my towel in hand!
SCC was able to make that advancement in elevator control because of the universal principle that elevator requiring beings moving through a temporal medium cause disruptions in that medium, and that intelligence equipped elevators that perceive the temporal medium can act on that perception. SCC would have never spent the money on R&D on this innovation if a goodly percentage of their customers moved through space but not time.
Using IQ is not really a good example, I think when talking about disability. For several reasons, first of all its a made up measurement of human intelligence. But who decide what intelligence is? Because you could argue that Einstein is very intelligent, probably not a lot that would doubt that
The person with the highest ever estimated IQ from what I could figure out is, William James Sidis who were estimated to have an IQ between 250 to 300, whereas the average person is around 100 as far as I know, but I doubt that he would look at us normal people as being disabled.
Obviously introducing fictive scenarios like adding extra arms to a person, greatly complicate this
You would still be part of that species, number of arms doesn't define what is human or not. Otherwise it would work the same were it the other way around and every human with only one leg or arm would no longer be considered human either, which is not the case either.
A person missing one arm can still, in the real world, live normally for the most part. This does not stop them from being disabled. It just measures the amount of impact their disability has upon them.
The polite term is probably the better one; I can't even tell you the PC term, as it's changed four times in my lifetime. You can probably expect autism to be renamed sometime within the next five or ten years, if certain growing internet trends are any sign.
Unfortunately, one of the barriers people don't discuss is the language barrier. The more education it requires to even tell someone you're disabled, the harder it is for someone else to understand you are and have an idea of what kinds of difficulties you are dealing with. Telling someone you have Aspergers is a lot more effective than telling them you're on the functional end of a certain spectrum disorder, in large part because "spectrum disorder" is an inherently confusing concept to the average person. It doesn't help that the language grows more confusing in response to the euphemism treadmill, turning what were polite and descriptive medical conditions (mental retardation) into vicious insults (retard).
So, to a certain degree, those who are disabled today have a much harder time advocating for themselves in part because they increasingly face having to explain their problems to a populace that simply doesn't understand the language they are using. In a corporate-run world, I can see a lot of the current accessibility options having simply vanished as cost-cutting methods simply because medical language has evolved to the point those who need those accessibility options cannot clearly communicate why the options are needed.
So, if anything, I expect far fewer ones present in CP2077 than in real life.
In your case, as with a friend of mine with MS (who was in the original CP 2013 playtest), the answer would be to buy a full-on linear frame. These are already being designed in the real world, BTW. As for the psychological implications; that's going to be something that needs to be determined on an individual level. That's pretty hard to do in a game without turning it into a psychological profile rather than an RPG.
However... I think that the fact that most people in Cyberpunk couldn't even hope to buy such a cyberenhancement is more telling, as it seriously addresses the horrible levels of inequity in a society that would deny someone the ability to just move around. That's even more f-ed up than whether or not you could/would choose that option or not. It's like people being forced to choose between the meds they need to stay alive and eating each month.
In my particular case that's both more, and less of a problem then you'd imagine.
Since my larynx was damaged and I can't speak (intelligibly) I just point to my mouth and sorta croak at them. Seems to transcend language barriers pretty well !
I think this is something most people "miss" when looking at Cyberpunk.
Most NPCs don't have cyber enhancements because they can barely (if that) afford rent and food. Players (and many GMs) assume everyone is cybered to the max.
The players are the lucky ones right out of the box, they can afford at least some cyberware.
Last edited:
Yes, all of this your average 30-40 year old Night City citizen can buy all on his salary. Oh wait, socialism was never a thing in a free state of california. Funny how in Cyberpunk, united states dismantled the display case of successful success of capitalism with USSR and commie china still around, not trying destroy the former one from the inside like IRL. Sure there should be some Cyberbolshevicks fed up with nonexistent goverment and corporate bullshit around, right?
Last edited:
Why do you think California split into multiple states?