Get Email Updates • Email this Topic • Print this Page
I didn't say there wasn't already inequality. It could generate further inequality, or it in and of itself could lead to a world where its improvements allowed for a society in which all would be able to obtain these improvements. Certainly there is already inequality. The danger is that if the procedure were not to become available to the vast majority, the inequality could become so great as for there to actually be somewhat valid arguments such that one group is actually measurably "better" than another and speciesism could cause the altered to treat the unaltered as though they are not sentient beings or to attempt eradicate them.
It could even be the other way around, in that though the bodies of the unaltered would be inferior, modern weaponry could still allow them to compete in war and even the bettered could be the ones that are slaughtered in the end instead.
I hate to think of the rich and powerful, who have already so badly messed up the world we live in, being able to mess up the human genome as well, even if it only their own children they mess up in this way. That's my gut reaction, but it's hardly philosophical! Slightly more philosophically: I don't think that we, individually or collectively, have (or perhaps even in principle could have) a clear enough concept of what is or is not a 'defect' for the premise of your thought-experiment even to be an intelligible one. However, of course, that does not mean that some crackpot interference with human genes based on confused thinking might not one day, possibly even quite soon, become a 'reality'. And I am not against the elimination of some scientifically definable physical defects, in principle, although I have worries about how society would in practice legislate for such manipulation. Our laws on other matters, such as drugs and sexuality, are often insane, and based on no clear moral or intellectual principles; and the longer we go on in our present direction (as tools of corporations, it seems), the bigger mess we seem to make of things. Oh dear, you're bringing out the pessimist in me! But you did put me on the spot, and I'm not answerable for the consequences. Rant ends.
The objective of breeding of dogs is always to "improve on the breed", and that is at least what they say in dog breeding sites. You might ask "How does one improve a breed?". One possible meaning is to find set of traits that are desirable. Suppose one day, scientists can select for traits they want, and manipulate the genes to get. What happens? Rich people would pay the money to improve their offspring, and after many generations of improvements. The aristocrats of our society is of different specie of human beings with super high IQ, and athletic ability.
1. Is it is good, and why is it good.
2. If it is not good, then why not? What can we do to prevent this from happening?
Given our limited knowledge of the huge number of genes on the human chromosomes, I'd say we are better off not messing with them.
Wasn't that Hitler's goal? Not the high IQ and fitness, but blond hair blue eyes?