The Instigator
John_Royals
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
SongHaGin
Con (against)
Winning
1 Points

Human Modification

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
SongHaGin
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 10/16/2015 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 459 times Debate No: 81055
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (3)
Votes (1)

 

John_Royals

Pro

With the rapidly growing pace of technology in Bio-engineering and Robotics, scientists are finding new ways to overcome disabilities that in years prior would have been permanent. The debate I want to hold is the implications and ethics of human modification, not the current results. So I listed it under philosophy. Again, this is not an argument of the results, just the ethical implications it poses on a broader/future spectrum. IE: Making everyone the same in terms of physical and mental capabilities. A good example of this is Kurt Vonnegut's short story Harrison Bergeron. Since it is philosophy ANY reference material can be used to support arguments (only in context of said reference) and references to support arguments is encouraged. The voting will be based on who thinks which side has more validity to their statements. So a level skill is measured in here, as well as content. Since there is no right answer, hopefully it will be an enlightening debate. First round is acceptance.
SongHaGin

Con

Acceptance!
I'll try this out and be against this.
Debate Round No. 1
John_Royals

Pro

It is very apparent in life, that some persons are born in better situations than others. Either due to region, or family, or just circumstances. "Life's not fair" is something we all know too well to be true. So, with this understanding and the understanding from Thomas Jefferson "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness." So if everyone has certain, unalienable rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness; why are we all not equal? Because of the limitations of society. Culture has bred people to have superiority in one aspect or another. The poor must work ten fold to be rich, the weak must work ten fold to match the strong. That is not equal, as Humans we are all born equal in terms of right's but not physically or otherwise. The only equality we have, is the right to live.

With Human Modification, we can undue the limitations life has placed on us. Instead of a debilitating disease preventing someone from every walking, or stepping out into the sun, or having a rational uninhibited thought; technology could modify us to reach a level we desire. On a physical level, a slow, weak individual could be just as strong as anyone. A person with mental deficiencies could think on a level of the brightest minds. Someone who was born without an immune system could walk through the rain-forest. Someone who doesn't like their eyes, or their body proportions can modify them to be how they picture themselves to be. These are just some of the ways we could modify ourselves to be better. Reducing the limitations of evolution, and truly making all of mankind equal.

Furthermore, why just level ourselves with modifications to these attributes. Through Human Modification we can break down the social barriers which restrict us from understanding. Allowing us to know any language and communicate on the same platform as everyone else; being able to see what others have seen in life so we can truly know the extent of their pain and empathize. Technology can truly make all of man equal, and allowing the modification of ourselves will brig about a better outlook than if we allow evolution, a process which takes millions of years to overcome our current problems. Let technology and Human modification be the forefront of research and let's all upgrade ourselves to be who we want to be without fear of being anything less.
SongHaGin

Con

Human modification isn't ethical.
Lot's of people believe that you should be happy with the way you were born and that God doesn't make mistakes.
To urge human modification would conflict with these believers.
Also, let's address the risks.
"The use of genetics to prevent illness may be a good idea in theory, but in experiments people have suffered side effects as severe as leukemia."(http://www.geneticengineeringinhumans.com...)
If a side effect as severe as leukemia can occur, the risks may outweigh the benefits. And while you may be trying to choose the right traits for your child, you may ruin the child's genes.
Maybe it isn't right at all.
Debate Round No. 2
John_Royals

Pro

John_Royals forfeited this round.
SongHaGin

Con

I'm going to be fair and not put down an argument. I have nothing to refute anyway.
Debate Round No. 3
John_Royals

Pro

John_Royals forfeited this round.
SongHaGin

Con

Once again, I will be fair.
Debate Round No. 4
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by SongHaGin 2 years ago
SongHaGin
Yeah, but I think I will have to forfeit this round. I don't have enough time to formulate a valid argument.
Posted by John_Royals 2 years ago
John_Royals
You will argue against?
Posted by SongHaGin 2 years ago
SongHaGin
I appreciate this, Can i request to debate?
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by lannan13 1 year ago
lannan13
John_RoyalsSongHaGinTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeiture