Do you support genetic engineering?

[paredler]

I think it's the only thing that can save humanity from itself.
Imagine, no more gene lottery, now you can control your children's genes and make sure they're the prettiest and strongest or maybe even the smartest. Imagine what our humanity could look like if everyone were attractive, athletic. No more bullying, no more rejection. Everyone is accepted, everyone is treated with respect. Everyone gets taken seriously. Everyone has an equal chance.

What could go wrong?

 

[identity0]

I suggest watching the film Gattaca

 

[Dr Iron Arc]

The earlier stages of gene editing will likely be more focused on repairing existing damage in people who are already alive. It would be nice if things like severe autism or eczema or diabetes could simply be edited out of people who currently suffer it. I think this phase of genetic engineering would be ideal.

Of course, it can't last forever sadly. Soon after it will delve into the murky territory of genetic selection you've described. People are naturally uncomfortable with it because it reeks of eugenics, which on paper doesn't sound so bad until one has to confront the history of eugenicists using it to satisfy their own personal biases rather than focus on improving humanity as a whole in a fair way. I don't really know what to make of this future era but I'm all for the era beforehand where we're just using genetic modification to fix people rather than optimize them.

 

[painfullypointless]

I used to feel excited about this topic; I used to feel excited for a lot of things, can't say that is the case now. I just don't want to be here anymore.
I want to be gone.

 

[goblinofisiyal11]

I suggest watching the film Gattaca

That film was made in 1997, alot about technology and the public perception of it has changed since then, genetic modification (or just eugenics without the rosy words) is definitely the right thing if done correctly. I read the film's synopsis, and it seems the wisdom/power of humanity is unrealistically low, with most of the power being focused on genetic engineering. In the real world if eugenics existed then there would not be the possibility of pretending to be a "valid", since if genetic modification was at the point where it is in the movie then so would the power of communication, and other natural sciences, not to mention philosophy and conventional wisdom. Of course the best node of the technology tree is that we don't exist as individual animal entities roaming the earth or wherever else but as one collective singularity, with zero possibility of communication delay or error, and the sum of all wisdom and ideas and joys into one which would accelerate power and wisdom even more at a perpetual rate.

 

[Quietist]

It could turn dystopian so quickly.

It wouldn't matter if we were all conventionally attractive, judgment of beauty is still subjective and there would still be competition, dark impulses, ill-will.

 

[DarkRange55]

The earlier stages of gene editing will likely be more focused on repairing existing damage in people who are already alive. It would be nice if things like severe autism or eczema or diabetes could simply be edited out of people who currently suffer it. I think this phase of genetic engineering would be ideal.

Of course, it can't last forever sadly. Soon after it will delve into the murky territory of genetic selection you've described. People are naturally uncomfortable with it because it reeks of eugenics, which on paper doesn't sound so bad until one has to confront the history of eugenicists using it to satisfy their own personal biases rather than focus on improving humanity as a whole in a fair way. I don't really know what to make of this future era but I'm all for the era beforehand where we're just using genetic modification to fix people rather than optimize them.

The earlier stages of gene editing will likely be more focused on repairing existing damage in people who are already alive. It would be nice if things like severe autism or eczema or diabetes could simply be edited out of people who currently suffer it. I think this phase of genetic engineering would be ideal.

Of course, it can't last forever sadly. Soon after it will delve into the murky territory of genetic selection you've described. People are naturally uncomfortable with it because it reeks of eugenics, which on paper doesn't sound so bad until one has to confront the history of eugenicists using it to satisfy their own personal biases rather than focus on improving humanity as a whole in a fair way. I don't really know what to make of this future era but I'm all for the era beforehand where we're just using genetic modification to fix people rather than optimize them.

Just in this same vein of things, whats interesting is, the 1420mhz hydrogen line, we've managed to do a fairly good job at keeping that in check globally. Don't broadcast at this frequency, leave it for the astronomers studying the hydrogen clouds of the universe. (Btw if you tried sending a secret message over that frequency then all then the astronomers in the world would hear you). So we can do things like this. Another one is there does seem to be a sort of self control in that we've had the ability for human cloning for years now. But nobody has done it so far as we know.

It just scares enough people that nobody does it. Nobody goes past a certain line just because it's too scary. You're always going to have someone somewhere who breaks the rules like this … (and will be located in secret labs in Shenyang and Siberia and North Korea and other places).

 

[Pluto]

 

[Agon321]

I am generally very supportive of this type of thing. I am a supporter of transhumanism, among other things.

However, part of me feels that it could end badly.
Such projects sound utopian, but who would it be good for?
I try not to be naive and this technology would not be available to all of humanity.
Rich and influential people would have control over it.
These people could create better people. Maybe even people created in this way would be considered a new race.
Poor people, etc. would probably not have access to this technology. Certainly not in the initial phase.

So I support and I am excited, but the experience I have already gained in this world tells me that very quickly this technology can go in different directions. Not every direction looks optimistic.
Especially since corporations and governments are already treating us like shit.

However, on the other hand, I am on the verge of death and potential negative consequences do not always matter to me.
So I am more willing to pay the price for the development of humanity than others.

 

[Forever Sleep]

It's a really interesting idea. Who gets to decide what is 'valuable' though? Surely- it will be what is most profitable? Why would you want a child that is good at art or music if they can make more money and have a more secure future as a scientist?

Will everyone just end up being the same? The same level to begin with at least? That sounds good. It at least sounds fair but- surely- there will still be competition for jobs etc. So now- what lengths will people go to, to stand out? Everyone is attractive. Great- but then, will everyone still be able to attract someone? Won't people then be on to the next thing to give themselves better chances? Plastic surgery, extreme diets and exercise routines? Will primary school children be taking Adderall to give them an edge academically?

Will competition end just because people started out on the same level? I doubt it. It's surely in part, the pressure to be attractive, clever, successful that is making people miserable. Even if they've actually 'made it'. Famous, rich people kill themselves too. Is a world even more geared towards achievement going to make us happier?

I think it's one of those ideas that sounds nice and fair but- could cause further problems if put into practice. Surely, it depends on economics too? All that is going to cost money. They're may be different levels to it that cost different amounts. Will a rich, upper class couple get the same treatment as someone on benefits? Surely, the rich couple will be able to afford a 'better' model.

That said- of course- if it was targetted at wiping out certain illnesses, that sounds beneficial.

I just have general reservations about f*cking about too much with nature I suppose. In part, because we don't develop our social laws to match. We're all living older now- hooray! Does anyone really stop to think that we might not all want to live that long though? What kind of quality of life are we having at the end? What age can we retire if our population continues to live longer and longer? The very worst of it though- why keep people trapped here in pain when they are desperate to be released?

Where does choice come in to this genetic engineering? Surely- parents who have 'designed' their child, probably undergone some sort of modified IVF, spent shit loads of money on their child may well feel even more possessive over it. What if their child still wants to be an artist or a musician but, they have the (expensive) superior genes for science? Genetic engineering may not influence who we want to be- rather than who our parents have decided we should be.

I suppose it's eugenics isn't it? That hasn't had the greatest reputation in human history.

 

[ijustwishtodie]

I support it as I believe that it should be used to eradicate genetic diseases such as autism. People keep on shouting at how it's "eugenics" which is bad but I don't see what's so bad in preventing future disabled people from coming into existence. The ones who oppose this act like they give a shit about disabled people but, if they really cared about disabled people, they would advocate to prevent future disabled people from coming into existence. I've yet to seen a valid counter argument as to why eugenics is wrong... all of the arguments I've seen so far are based on emotion regarding how preventing somebody from being born = murder or how this power would be misused.

All in all though, genetic engineering would only be a short term solution as, once all of the diseases and defects were to be eliminated, we would eventually arrive back to where we started simply because of the basic principle that it's impossible for everybody to have an equal amount of x trait. In other words, it's impossible for everybody to be beautiful and smart and athletic as then the definition of what is smart and beautiful and so on will just merely shift to accommodate the current demand. This is one thing that I loathe about humans but it's true. What we consider to be exceptional would merely be the norm and then what's beautiful or ugly will merely oscillate around that

 

[Depressed2]

I love these topics.
I am a firm believer that i could change our lives in a better way.

 

[Hvergelmir]

I've yet to seen a valid counter argument as to why eugenics is wrong...

Disregarding the practical aspect of pairing and breeding people, and assuming enthusiastic and willing participants, I don't see any fundamental difference between eugenics and breeding of other species. It's not fundamentally wrong, but it has not always been for the greater good of the species.
The issue lies in deciding what criteria to select for. For any set of criteria you use, there's a set of criteria you disregard.

Natural selection ensures a high level of diversity.
We don't know what it would mean for humanity in the long term, to selectively breed people. We also wouldn't be able to agree on the selection criteria.
Resistance against one decease could for example make you weak to another.

To me, genetic engineering is just a more advanced version of selective breeding, with the same problems.
It's not wrong, but quite possibly unwise. It ought to be approached with caution.

(The linked picture isn't representative of all modern lines of gsd, but it clearly demonstrate the issues caused by selective breeding. The gsd is also not unique in this regard, but a very well known example.)

 

[UnluckyBastard]

Yes absolutely. Imagine a world where genetic diseases cease to exist, where birth defects can be detected and treated before being born, and where true equal opportunity can be achieved.

I suggest watching the film Gattaca

It's a good movie. Although the technology behind that is now considered dated.

 

[timeless001]

People would still find reasons to be dicks to each other and fight over power, influence and money. We evolved to be that way and it wouldn't stop just because everyone was good looking.

 

[Ferdinand Bardamu]

Eugenics is great. If you disagree, you are Dysgenic. So, yeah, I'm all for it.

 

[amerie]

Yes and idgaf, growing up disabled was awful. I want my children to be healthy and beautiful, so they at least have better circumstances when they're born.

I support it as I believe that it should be used to eradicate genetic diseases such as autism. People keep on shouting at how it's "eugenics" which is bad but I don't see what's so bad in preventing future disabled people from coming into existence. The ones who oppose this act like they give a shit about disabled people but, if they really cared about disabled people, they would advocate to prevent future disabled people from coming into existence. I've yet to seen a valid counter argument as to why eugenics is wrong... all of the arguments I've seen so far are based on emotion regarding how preventing somebody from being born = murder or how this power would be misused.

All in all though, genetic engineering would only be a short term solution as, once all of the diseases and defects were to be eliminated, we would eventually arrive back to where we started simply because of the basic principle that it's impossible for everybody to have an equal amount of x trait. In other words, it's impossible for everybody to be beautiful and smart and athletic as then the definition of what is smart and beautiful and so on will just merely shift to accommodate the current demand. This is one thing that I loathe about humans but it's true. What we consider to be exceptional would merely be the norm and then what's beautiful or ugly will merely oscillate around that

I strongly suspect I have autism but it's not confirmed so I'm not going to speak on behalf of autistic people

However alongside that I have ADHD and an SLD and fuck my life is so shit, I have to work so much harder than others for the simplest things and I am so easily exhausted. Please for the love of god if you know you have mental issues (like my father did) use a condom or make sure you take your birth control so you don't spread that type of pain onto a child. It's not fair how you're setting up an innocent baby to have to fight in a world they didn't ask to be born into

Eugenics is great. If you disagree, you are Dysgenic. So, yeah, I'm all for it.

Was the second part necessary? People who aren't genetically favorable still deserve respect.

People would still find reasons to be dicks to each other and fight over power, influence and money. We evolved to be that way and it wouldn't stop just because everyone was good looking.

But if you had advantages like intelligence, good looks, etc. life would be significantly easier. Life isn't supposed to be handy dandy but it shouldn't be unfair, everyone deserves the right to an equal opportunity to succeed but it doesn't mean that it's guaranteed and that everyone will be happy. Unfortunately with the current scheme of things life is more in other peoples favor than others.