[this text uses sarcasm as a literary machine; it is not to be equated with reality nor with the author]

We rob the human from its complexity by equating each individual to being a(s a) machine:

a human as clockwork = a machine; because at that time they did not know of 3D holograms & quantum computers yet. The gearbox and automaton were the next best thing.

a human as a replica = a machine which pretends to believe in a superior original; somewhere (metaphor for that father-figure, hero, leader with god-like features, that ideal specimen) 

a human as an avatar = a bio-mimicked machine; perhaps over time to be reversed to be that bio-mass that is controlled by a representation in a metaverse

a human (as a) resource = a machine put to good use by external definition; “good” for someone, somewhere; at least, for some time; at the least resistance, and least cost as possible

a human as a profile = a 2D machine to operate another machine as if more for “you”; desirably or undesirably so.

a human as a dataset = a machine that needs an external engine to operate so to enable the machinery-of-extraction; as gutting a machine for parts

a human as a substitutable = a mass-produced closed-hardware machine with built-in obsolescence

…all of these machines are categorizable as variants of a passive system that is triggered for a collection of only desired responses to exacted external stimuli. 

In between its input and output lies a black box that should and must process toward the desired output; the less process the better; the faster process the better. If its output is not desirable the machine is broken; or so it is to its owner, its user or its creator. Solution? Dispose of the machine (since circular economy is not yet scaled & ubiquitous for all machines out there):

Through the above-mentioned owner’s lens: A human as an owned machine is enslaved (= robot)

Through a user’s lens: A human as a used machine is a utility (= like water, gas, electricity)

These pills have generic viagra no prescription to be used with drinking water only. What you can do best is to treat Erectile Dysfunction with icks.org viagra ordination(Sildenafil Citrate). It would not be wrong to say that it can cialis on sale have a harmful impact on any man. Depending on your health condition and other non-medicinal methods you viagra fast shipping should try.

Through a creator’s lens: A human as a created machine is either trendy and novel, or up for auction, or simply passé ( = that before the next best creative design or desired upgrade)

Only, …there is a small issue:

…non of the above is exactly the case.

Or at least the metaphor is a reductionist metaphor and not to be confused with what it maps out. The human proverbial black box does not do this, or that. It doesn’t  deliver this nor that, at all times; efficiently nor unwaveringly

Yes, regrettably, this observation might be annoying to some who aspire to an absolute solution to their grievances, within which the defunct machined human does not fit. Oops. Now what?

That equation of the human as a machine is hubris if the metaphor means that, that what it refers to is built by us by means of orchestrated plan, can be invented by us, manufactured (in consent, form and function) by us, can be fully controlled by us, reverse-engineered or rebuilt in all its details; by us. Note: “us” is thus a collective of machines designing, creating, decompiling collectable machines. Nah… not entirely, no. Though…:

The main concern might not be whether we are machines or not. Let’s assume we are “machines” rather than *machines*. Let’s assume we are highly complex machines; at least through its own observation of itself. We, who look at ourselves as being machines, are not there yet (if ever) to truly understand our own machinery, unless we like to melt or be blinded à la Icarus by those (intrinsic, extrinsic and in-between) attributes, mechanisms, sub-systems, asynchronous or atypical systems and processes we had not foreseen nor calculated for.

To equate us humans as machines, even metaphorically, might, to date, still be too premature. It might be magical scientism, given materialist form, through a rhetoric, perverting engineering. It might be offensive to both the forms of scientific methodologies and engineering practices, as applications of the scientific methodologies, alike. 

While evolution might be metaphored (yes a newly machined verb) as such, I regret to say that the human is not the application of the observed nor the experimented (alone). The human can be observed (and, yes, is experimented upon) which can allow for applications based on, or for, or within, or in-between, that same human and that other human and that in (idealized) harmony with their environments.

Seeing the human as (if) a machine might be confusing cause and effect. It might be equating the mapped human with the world of (being and becoming) human(e) well-beings.

be patient fellow machines, perhaps one day, if we play nicely, and diligently, we might rejoice. Until then — with love, well-being and life— only human.