Primrose Road

Chabad.org offers up an not-really-posthumanist argument in one writer's attempt to engage with the "Can You Prove You're Not a Machine?" question:

we can't *prove* we're not machines ---> wait a second, we do operate kind of like machines ---> ............
----> but we're just *not* machines, we can't be ---> the difference between people and machines is the possibility for embracing God and meaning ---> you should embrace God and look for meaning and holiness in everyday life.

An argument with slightly fewer open spaces but more open questions might be:
we can't *prove* we're not machines ---> wait a second, we do operate kind of like machines ---> but aren't meaning, and God, and consciousness what make us human? ---> then ...????????

Score one for posthumanism: at the University of Reading, they've developed a brain-like robot controlled by rat neurons. (Read about it here and listen to the report on The Skeptics' Guide To The Universe.) Apparently, the robot was able to "learn" within a week.

Some (over)excited commentators on newer media have posited that programming, hypertext, and/or networking serve as not merely metaphors but near-perfect models for how the human brain works. Posthumanism does something different: it starts from the idea that we can create consciousness in a lab. If consciousness can develop and function outside the human brain, "consciousness" is not necessarily human nor is it what necessarily makes us human.

This works out quite nicely for humanities-people seeking a philosophy that doesn't overvalue consciousness ("subjectivity" = thinking makes it so?) and for science-people who are (thankfully) challenging neo-Cartesian dualist arguments.