By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Sun, 19 Jul 2009 06:24:56 +0000

The next generation will experiment on themselves. Consider steroid use in athletes. Everyone knows the negative consequences are unacceptable in the long term but there are still people who feel they can ‘win’ in the short term.
In the case of voluntary sociopathy perhaps the procedure(s) involved are not permanent? Suppose I can wake up M-F and put “insentive sociopath” in my coffee to be more productive at work then on the weekends have a nice big breakfast of “compassionate altruism” – am I a bad person? Is this so much different than those who live in metro apartments during the week and return to their suburban families on weekends? How/why?

By: Eadwacer

Eadwacer — Sat, 18 Jul 2009 21:02:27 +0000

The problem I have with both addition and subtraction is what might be called ‘hubris’. I am all for enhancements and de-unenhancements, but there’s this problem, best summed up by the old phrase – ‘you can’t do just one thing’. Do we know what the side-effects (AKA the effects) of changing gene X are? Will we spend the time to find out before assuming that we know the important results and pressing on? The classic case, from nature, is where improving resistence to malaria causes increased susceptibility to sickle-cell disease. I’d worry that we don’t know yet what all the side effects are, and that we will jump into the add/subtract game without a clear understanding of them — and that there is no ethical way of finding out short of experimenting on the next generation.

Comments on: Future Values

By: Anonymous

By: Eadwacer