Why do you think its Hollywood? I mean people will always try to exploit things to benefit their kids. Look at W how did he get into to yale or harvard despite being a bad student? Think of all the tiger moms, football dads, or baseball parents. If they could do some genetic engineering to make sure their kid got into harvard or got a D1 scholarship you don't think they will do that? At that point if you aren't engineering your kids you are at a severe disadvantage.
Actually what is so bad about super humans? If we become stronger, smarter, faster, can withstand much greater heat/cold, etc. That just increases the chance that our race will survive, we might actually create wrap engines in the future. :grin:
I disagree. I'd actually argue that it makes our chances of surviving decrease. It exemplifies the biggest threat humans face, other humans. In theory being able to modify humans seems positive but in reality we will abuse it just like we do with everything else. "Playing God" if/when it happens will open up a box that'll cripple us in the long term. Oh well, it'll most likely happen and we wont see the danger until its inevitably too late.
Because history has shown that it has only happen in Hollywood When I was talking about super human, I was thinking a bit more on the super side such as xray vision, breathing water, flying perhaps... those cool things. So, let's imagine it's possible, through genetic engineering, to increase intelligent, emotional smarts, empathy, people skills, learning abilities, physical traits, etcs... the good stuffs. Why shouldn't we want or not allow that? Because only the Rich can have it and that creates an even more un-leveled playing field? My response to that is make it available to everyone that wants it. This is already the case for health care in most developed countries (U.S. being one of the few exception). Raising people to a higher level is not necessary a bad thing. Remember hundreds of years ago, only the Rich can get education? If society had said, that's not fair and take education away from everyone, where would we be today? Instead, what happen is let's make it free and available to all (we aren't there yet but you get the idea). Same can happen with genetic engineering. Of course, the danger of going over the top and beyond what's "acceptable" to society is where we need international guidelines, bodies to help steer the direction, especially early-on. All of this could be mute. What we should aim for is eliminating horrible disease and mental illness. If and when it comes to the point that genetic engineering can go beyond that, we deal with it. p.s. beside, today we live in a world where from the starts, richer folks can support their love ones at a higher degree prior to birth. They have better care, better nutrition, better education, etcs... They are at an advantage due to their wealth. Genetic engineering, may be a way, through universal provider to level out the playing field. Since we are talking about hollywood and imaginary things, imagine if through G.E., folks are born with smarts and ability to be happy and successful without being dependent on external factors and influences of money... p.s.2- I would be much more concern about the danger of a horrible gene going into the population than a super human race
The playing God argument is often overwrought. If you're against humans having discretion and control over natural processes, then you lost the plot as soon as Mesopotamian farmers planted their way to superior Mendelian mechanics, and dogs were domesticated. Scientific progress only accelerates and extends that discretion and makes it the product of precision rather than the gifts of intuition.
I know you're discussing it with another member, but I have to jump in. You can't be that naive to think humans would only modify the good and follow "guidelines," do you? It's all fun and games when people (in your scenario everyone) start making Lebron's with high IQ and excellent people skills but there's no way we'd stop there. All it takes is one idiot with a grudge against the world to start mass producing elite "super soldiers" and raging war. One thing I know for sure, the world is filled with idiots.
I made both of your points already (i.e. I agree with those points). What prevent anyone from doing something crazy? Nothing. It's not in your control or anyone control. That, as a reason to not progress toward the potential good of genetic engineering is boxing yourself in from progressing. We proceed with controlled caution by international community or we let it go wild. Which would you prefer? Stopping it from proceeding is naive.
The keyword is natural. There's a huge difference between domesticating dogs over time versus genetically modifying dogs to be what we know dogs to be now. It's playing God. It takes anything natural out of the equation. In theory it should all make sense. We can eliminate certain problems that have faced the world for centuries. Human nature, however, has proven that we won't stop there.
I have no problem with this science as it's groundbreaking and can lead to great scientific pioneering. I do have a problem with the clinical real world ethical implications. Great power comes great responsibility, and it should only be used for treatments rather than cosmetics. Still, this is decades away from genetically engineering real life humans, possibly centuries. Yields are really low and more long-term studies have to be done. The science will get there some day, but not in our lifetime.
I admire your trust in people. And no, that's not a backhanded compliment. How about we just don't do it? If an international community is all it takes to control something as (potentially) powerful as genetically modified people then why haven't any multinational agencies been successful in sustained peace? Why are we constantly worried about other nations developing nuclear weapons or persecuting innocent people? It's against the "rules" isn't it? We can argue over modifying people all day but to think that people will follow "guidelines," international or not, is extremely naive. Even if you make the laws draconian, they won't be followed by all.
] Well maybe they will have to genetically modify humans to cope with climate change. Normal evolution may not be fast enough.
I think the problem is that you lose diversity and end up with one homogeneous population... because there will be a 'best' template for all people.
I don't think this is any more reprehensible or troubling than American nuclear weaponization in the '30s and '40s, which entailed and engendered staggering developments and innovation down the road.
How would we just don't do it? China scientists already did it. We get the international community to agree to stop everyone from doing it? That would never happen given the international community could not stand on any ground for preventing nation from wanting to develop "cures" to diseases. Even if it does happen, you already stated that doesn't work. Simply put, there is no way to prevent this from happening. Guidelines and standard help to make it safer and more ethical. It would greatly benefit good scientists from Country such as China and other nation that might not have the high standard or maybe even knowledge of the how to reduce the dangers of this. Once we have established guidelines and standard, we have the option to push it another step forward - watchdog body that monitor for violation and uses international economic, political, or even military pressure against those that violate. It's the best you can do.
The potential danger is probably on the same level, but the intent and initial goals are very different.
Between this and technology like nanobots, I think death will cease to be inevitable within two or three more generations.
When I was younger (I'm still waiting to get old ), the possibility of test tube babies was hotly debated ... and then it happened. Cloning animals was hotly debated ... and then it happened. Sadly, we all know that, sooner or later, human genetic engineering will occur. I'm not supporting it, but I'm positive it will happen, perhaps with catastrophic results and perhaps with the improvement of the human condition ... probably both. Some posters here are livid when it comes to the haves and have nots, the super wealthy and the rest of us. Can you imagine the Huxleyian Brave New World of the master race and the rest of us?
