Total Posts:32|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Bio-engineered Humans

FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/19/2010 8:43:26 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
Engineering humans from birth to be perfect social beings. Eliminating crime at the very source. This sounds fantastic but it's something that could far too easily get out of hand. What is your opinion?
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
lovelife
Posts: 14,629
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/19/2010 8:49:57 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 10/19/2010 8:43:26 PM, FREEDO wrote:
Engineering humans from birth to be perfect social beings. Eliminating crime at the very source. This sounds fantastic but it's something that could far too easily get out of hand. What is your opinion?

I think I remember reading in science that those altered live shorter lives that tend to be more unhealthy, but that might only be cloning -_- I'm not sure, I read about both at the same time >.<
Without Royal there is a hole inside of me, I have no choice but to leave
FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/19/2010 8:50:23 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 10/19/2010 8:48:27 PM, Caramel wrote:
Is there a "crime gene" they could remove, or what?

Lack of empathy and lack of intelligence are the two biggest factors.
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/19/2010 8:51:03 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 10/19/2010 8:49:57 PM, lovelife wrote:
At 10/19/2010 8:43:26 PM, FREEDO wrote:
Engineering humans from birth to be perfect social beings. Eliminating crime at the very source. This sounds fantastic but it's something that could far too easily get out of hand. What is your opinion?

I think I remember reading in science that those altered live shorter lives that tend to be more unhealthy, but that might only be cloning -_- I'm not sure, I read about both at the same time >.<

Humans have never been cloned before. (at least to public knowledge)
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/19/2010 8:53:13 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
You don't need to do it b4 birth...

Labotomies are would definitely most easily be performed Post-birth.

... though (for safety's sake) you might have to deal with the anti-social little babe until it grows up a little bit... otherwise he/she might have plausibly end up having some "negative affects" from the, otherwise benevolent, procedure.
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
Caramel
Posts: 855
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/19/2010 8:57:34 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 10/19/2010 8:50:23 PM, FREEDO wrote:
At 10/19/2010 8:48:27 PM, Caramel wrote:
Is there a "crime gene" they could remove, or what?

Lack of empathy and lack of intelligence are the two biggest factors.

Empathy is learned, not engineered, and I doubt there is much of a correlation between intelligence and evil.
no comment
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/19/2010 9:02:07 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
Main problems I see:

1) A further gap in the rich and the poor. The rich will be able to afford to bio-engineer their children so that he or she will become successful in the future while the poor will not.
2) Governmental and parental abuse of the system to make the person more obedient or susceptible to a certain ideology.

Although I am in favor of drugs that causes either biological or mental changes, the human who is being bio-engineered does not really have a choice of what type of person he or she wants to be bio-engineered to and the changes could be permanent.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/19/2010 9:04:13 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 10/19/2010 8:57:34 PM, Caramel wrote:
At 10/19/2010 8:50:23 PM, FREEDO wrote:
At 10/19/2010 8:48:27 PM, Caramel wrote:
Is there a "crime gene" they could remove, or what?

Lack of empathy and lack of intelligence are the two biggest factors.

Empathy is learned, not engineered, and I doubt there is much of a correlation between intelligence and evil.

Very untrue. Psychopaths, who make up roughly 1 in 100 of the population have dysfunctional amygdalas and also lack proper allocation of serotonin and oxytocin. And the prison population generally has a much lower IQ than the general population, aside from psychopaths who usual are more intelligent.
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
Caramel
Posts: 855
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/19/2010 9:05:50 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
Darkkermit this isn't the cause of rich and poor: capitalism is. If we're going to keep capitalism, there's no use sweating over everything we do that is going to cause class segregation, because just about everythin we create is going to be over-used by the rich and under-used by the poor. Try thinking about the root of the problem!
no comment
FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/19/2010 9:07:27 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 10/19/2010 9:02:07 PM, darkkermit wrote:
Main problems I see:

1) A further gap in the rich and the poor. The rich will be able to afford to bio-engineer their children so that he or she will become successful in the future while the poor will not.
2) Governmental and parental abuse of the system to make the person more obedient or susceptible to a certain ideology.

Well, there's two different ways it could be done. The Capitalist way would be for this to become a business for parents to pay into and pick what their children are going to be like, which could be anything. Or the Socialist way of a government initiative aimed at a specific goal, such as crime reduction.

Although I am in favor of drugs that causes either biological or mental changes, the human who is being bio-engineered does not really have a choice of what type of person he or she wants to be bio-engineered to and the changes could be permanent.

They wouldn't have a choice anyway.
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
mongeese
Posts: 5,387
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/19/2010 9:13:00 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 10/19/2010 9:07:27 PM, FREEDO wrote:
At 10/19/2010 9:02:07 PM, darkkermit wrote:
Main problems I see:

1) A further gap in the rich and the poor. The rich will be able to afford to bio-engineer their children so that he or she will become successful in the future while the poor will not.
2) Governmental and parental abuse of the system to make the person more obedient or susceptible to a certain ideology.

Well, there's two different ways it could be done. The Capitalist way would be for this to become a business for parents to pay into and pick what their children are going to be like, which could be anything. Or the Socialist way of a government initiative aimed at a specific goal, such as crime reduction.

There's another option for a Socialist government: bio-engineering children to obey the government. Like 1984. Except with DNA, instead of just propaganda. Therefore, no more power struggles. Just constant misery.
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/19/2010 9:15:02 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 10/19/2010 9:07:27 PM, FREEDO wrote:
At 10/19/2010 9:02:07 PM, darkkermit wrote:
Main problems I see:

1) A further gap in the rich and the poor. The rich will be able to afford to bio-engineer their children so that he or she will become successful in the future while the poor will not.
2) Governmental and parental abuse of the system to make the person more obedient or susceptible to a certain ideology.

Well, there's two different ways it could be done. The Capitalist way would be for this to become a business for parents to pay into and pick what their children are going to be like, which could be anything. Or the Socialist way of a government initiative aimed at a specific goal, such as crime reduction.


It's a choice between evil, and the socialism way is much worse than the capitalism way. Just think about how the government can use this to manipulate us, to allow us to become obedient, destroy free thinking, and enslave us all.

Although I am in favor of drugs that causes either biological or mental changes, the human who is being bio-engineered does not really have a choice of what type of person he or she wants to be bio-engineered to and the changes could be permanent.

They wouldn't have a choice anyway.

What do you mean by this statement?
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/19/2010 9:18:39 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 10/19/2010 9:13:00 PM, mongeese wrote:
At 10/19/2010 9:07:27 PM, FREEDO wrote:
At 10/19/2010 9:02:07 PM, darkkermit wrote:
Main problems I see:

1) A further gap in the rich and the poor. The rich will be able to afford to bio-engineer their children so that he or she will become successful in the future while the poor will not.
2) Governmental and parental abuse of the system to make the person more obedient or susceptible to a certain ideology.

Well, there's two different ways it could be done. The Capitalist way would be for this to become a business for parents to pay into and pick what their children are going to be like, which could be anything. Or the Socialist way of a government initiative aimed at a specific goal, such as crime reduction.

There's another option for a Socialist government: bio-engineering children to obey the government. Like 1984. Except with DNA, instead of just propaganda. Therefore, no more power struggles. Just constant misery.

Yep. Like I said, it could easily get way out of hand.
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/19/2010 9:20:04 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 10/19/2010 9:15:02 PM, darkkermit wrote:
At 10/19/2010 9:07:27 PM, FREEDO wrote:
At 10/19/2010 9:02:07 PM, darkkermit wrote:
Main problems I see:

1) A further gap in the rich and the poor. The rich will be able to afford to bio-engineer their children so that he or she will become successful in the future while the poor will not.
2) Governmental and parental abuse of the system to make the person more obedient or susceptible to a certain ideology.

Well, there's two different ways it could be done. The Capitalist way would be for this to become a business for parents to pay into and pick what their children are going to be like, which could be anything. Or the Socialist way of a government initiative aimed at a specific goal, such as crime reduction.


It's a choice between evil, and the socialism way is much worse than the capitalism way. Just think about how the government can use this to manipulate us, to allow us to become obedient, destroy free thinking, and enslave us all.

Parents can do exactly the same. The only difference is that their isn't a specific agenda.

Although I am in favor of drugs that causes either biological or mental changes, the human who is being bio-engineered does not really have a choice of what type of person he or she wants to be bio-engineered to and the changes could be permanent.

They wouldn't have a choice anyway.

What do you mean by this statement?

I mean nobody gets to choose their biology.
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/19/2010 9:42:04 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 10/19/2010 9:20:04 PM, FREEDO wrote:
At 10/19/2010 9:15:02 PM, darkkermit wrote:
At 10/19/2010 9:07:27 PM, FREEDO wrote:
At 10/19/2010 9:02:07 PM, darkkermit wrote:
Main problems I see:

1) A further gap in the rich and the poor. The rich will be able to afford to bio-engineer their children so that he or she will become successful in the future while the poor will not.
2) Governmental and parental abuse of the system to make the person more obedient or susceptible to a certain ideology.

Well, there's two different ways it could be done. The Capitalist way would be for this to become a business for parents to pay into and pick what their children are going to be like, which could be anything. Or the Socialist way of a government initiative aimed at a specific goal, such as crime reduction.


It's a choice between evil, and the socialism way is much worse than the capitalism way. Just think about how the government can use this to manipulate us, to allow us to become obedient, destroy free thinking, and enslave us all.

Parents can do exactly the same. The only difference is that their isn't a specific agenda.

Yea, both of them are evil, the more evil the one with a specific agenda and can control people by the masses, while I doubt every parent would choose bioengineering their child.


Although I am in favor of drugs that causes either biological or mental changes, the human who is being bio-engineered does not really have a choice of what type of person he or she wants to be bio-engineered to and the changes could be permanent.

They wouldn't have a choice anyway.

What do you mean by this statement?

I mean nobody gets to choose their biology.

Alright, I'll concede that point.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
Zetsubou
Posts: 4,933
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/19/2010 9:59:57 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
Lol, go ahead, freedom of choice.

I'm against the national/"socialist" initiative though, it's not a right but a liberty to 'engineer' your children, the state has no right to intervene in such affairs.
'sup DDO -- july 2013
FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/19/2010 10:02:02 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 10/19/2010 9:59:57 PM, Zetsubou wrote:
Lol, go ahead, freedom of choice.

I'm against the national/"socialist" initiative though, it's not a right but a liberty to 'engineer' your children, the state has no right to intervene in such affairs.

So parents own their children like objects?
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/19/2010 10:02:45 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 10/19/2010 10:01:43 PM, Zetsubou wrote:
Freedo, your idea isn't socialist it's statist, start calling it as such.

I never said what side I was on. I don't have one.
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/19/2010 10:14:35 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 10/19/2010 9:05:50 PM, Caramel wrote:
Darkkermit this isn't the cause of rich and poor: capitalism is. If we're going to keep capitalism, there's no use sweating over everything we do that is going to cause class segregation, because just about everythin we create is going to be over-used by the rich and under-used by the poor. Try thinking about the root of the problem!

There are huge reasons to sweat over things that can cause class segregation. Social mobility is not too difficult in capitalism. Public schools from K-12 in the US are free and public colleges are at a reduced rate for in-state tuition.
However, bioengineering creates a HUGE advantage for the rich against the poor like nothing seen before.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
Zetsubou
Posts: 4,933
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/19/2010 10:49:50 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 10/19/2010 10:02:02 PM, FREEDO wrote:
At 10/19/2010 9:59:57 PM, Zetsubou wrote:
Lol, go ahead, freedom of choice.

I'm against the national/"socialist" initiative though, it's not a right but a liberty to 'engineer' your children, the state has no right to intervene in such affairs.

So parents own their children like objects?
There not born yet lol, they can kill them if they want. Unless you mean they're trained form birth then perhaps, but that's quite alot like parenting.

At 10/19/2010 10:02:45 PM, FREEDO wrote:
At 10/19/2010 10:01:43 PM, Zetsubou wrote:
Freedo, your idea isn't socialist it's statist, start calling it as such.

I never said what side I was on. I don't have one.

Just don't call it socialist.
'sup DDO -- july 2013
Caramel
Posts: 855
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/19/2010 11:55:39 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 10/19/2010 10:14:35 PM, darkkermit wrote:
At 10/19/2010 9:05:50 PM, Caramel wrote:
Darkkermit this isn't the cause of rich and poor: capitalism is. If we're going to keep capitalism, there's no use sweating over everything we do that is going to cause class segregation, because just about everythin we create is going to be over-used by the rich and under-used by the poor. Try thinking about the root of the problem!

There are huge reasons to sweat over things that can cause class segregation. Social mobility is not too difficult in capitalism. Public schools from K-12 in the US are free and public colleges are at a reduced rate for in-state tuition.
However, bioengineering creates a HUGE advantage for the rich against the poor like nothing seen before.

I'm still not getting through to you. There is absolutely nothing inherently favorable about bioengineering to rich folk. Nothing. You are chasing reflections. Anything that takes considerable amounts of resources to acquire is going to end up concentrated in the hands of the rich (except special things like education that you pointed out that must be subsidized by the government to even work in the first place) simply due to our economic system - capitalism. Fast cars don't inherently favor the rich because of some attribute of fast cars, they favor the rich because capitalism maneuvers fast cars into the hands of those who have lots of money. To say that we should stop making fast cars now because they are favoring the rich, as if fast cars have some kind of innate function for the rich and not the poor, is not logical.

My point is that your concern is a small corner of a vast category of problems that only exist because of capitalism. Problems of class division will continue (and continue this trend of worsening) until we fix the root of the problem. It seems as if no one is capable of zooming out and seeing the forest for the trees however, because it is too alarming to people to think that the way we do things could be wrong.
no comment
Korashk
Posts: 4,597
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/20/2010 12:02:33 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 10/19/2010 9:04:13 PM, FREEDO wrote:
Very untrue. Psychopaths, who make up roughly 1 in 100 of the population

This statistic sounds like BS.
When large numbers of otherwise-law abiding people break specific laws en masse, it's usually a fault that lies with the law. - Unknown
Caramel
Posts: 855
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/20/2010 12:50:03 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 10/20/2010 12:02:33 AM, Korashk wrote:
At 10/19/2010 9:04:13 PM, FREEDO wrote:
Very untrue. Psychopaths, who make up roughly 1 in 100 of the population

This statistic sounds like BS.

Just because he made it up on the spot doesn't mean it's wrong...
no comment
FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/20/2010 1:05:22 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 10/20/2010 12:02:33 AM, Korashk wrote:
At 10/19/2010 9:04:13 PM, FREEDO wrote:
Very untrue. Psychopaths, who make up roughly 1 in 100 of the population

This statistic sounds like BS.

I got it from the Discovery Channel.
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
nonentity
Posts: 5,008
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/20/2010 1:09:31 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 10/20/2010 1:05:22 AM, FREEDO wrote:
At 10/20/2010 12:02:33 AM, Korashk wrote:
At 10/19/2010 9:04:13 PM, FREEDO wrote:
Very untrue. Psychopaths, who make up roughly 1 in 100 of the population

This statistic sounds like BS.

I got it from the Discovery Channel.

I don't think "psychopath" is a diagnosis on the DSM-IV-TR so that in itself sounds sketchy to me lol
Ren
Posts: 7,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/20/2010 1:42:03 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
Eugenics has many, many historically proven problems. But, to summarize:

1. Failed attempts, which are inevitable.

2. Determinants for perfection.

3. Gender variability.

4. Imperfect social influences (such as, the false perception that any ethnicity is better than another or unhealthy beauty ideals).

5. Further vilification of sex (we really don't want to do this to ourselves).
kogline
Posts: 134
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/20/2010 4:58:41 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
i think you are referring to genetic engineering, not bio engineering. with genetic engineering the product is a 100% biological organism created by altering genes to get a desired result.

with bio engineering the product is not purely biological, it actually refers to a fusion of mechanical engineering with biological organisms. for example artificial hearts or organs that contain both biological tissue and mechanical parts.

@lovelife- you are most likely thinking of cloning because the clones although born like babies have a similar biological age to the "Parent" organism. this is thought to be because aging related effects are mostly due to deterioration of the end points of genes, and these are carried over when the organism is cloned. theres other factors that play a role of course like the technique of the scientist performing the experiment, but these should be corrected by refined techniques and understanding.

there is a group called the abolitionists who proprose that we use biotechnology as the best way of abolishing all pain and suffering in the world for every organism. ive only recently discovered them so i havent had time to read through pretty much anything on their site, but will be looking into this as it is very interesting to me. one thing worth noting from them is that they pointed out that social and economic reform,while great in a way, have failed to produce significant increases in average happiness for humanity. this is because we,and every other creature, are pretty much biologically programmed to a certain amount of happiness and that gains and losses are only temporary boosts to happy/unhappy. so we cannot reach a utopian world by changing social and economic policies, because we must change our biology to recduce pain and suffering.

and to repeat what i freedo(or somebody) said, engineering your children doesnt take any choices away from them because they dont have any to begin with. this along with the appeal to nature fallacy were some of the more annoying arguments i had to deal with when arguing in my moral philosophy class when it came to cloning/engineering humans.

darkkermit
"""It's a choice between evil, and the socialism way is much worse than the capitalism way. Just think about how the government can use this to manipulate us, to allow us to become obedient, destroy free thinking, and enslave us all."""

the problem with this is the enslave us all
we would be fine because we are already born and are citizens, using using engineering to create a mindless slave race who feels no pain or misery or thought would be very beneficial to us. we would not be enslaved by the higher powers of the world we would be the ones at the top. (unless the higher powers after creating the slave race decide we're no longer necessary)

overall i think its a goal we should be striving to accomplish. (using bioengineering for the greater good)
if state farm has perfected teleportation technology why do they still sell car insurance?
kogline
Posts: 134
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/20/2010 5:04:36 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 10/20/2010 1:42:03 AM, Ren wrote:

5. Further vilification of sex (we really don't want to do this to ourselves).

actually going back to the abolitionist movement i mentioned in my wall of text earlier, we will eventually be able to bioenginnered devices to control our own pleasure centers allowing us to hit buttons that give us instant pleasure being equal or greater than that of an orgasm, rendering sex useless except for reproduction and romantics who like the idea of just being close with someone as opposed to instant gratification.

some thing about the instant stim, is in current research side affects are pretty much nil (as opposed to drugs, sex, other ways of acquiring pleasure)
and that the stim does not grow tolerant requiring more dangerous levels of stim, (drugs, other examples etc.)
if state farm has perfected teleportation technology why do they still sell car insurance?