/sci/ - Science & Math

>>12350004
>The corresponding ethical issues of genetic engineering are complex and deserve serious attention in what may be a relatively short interval before these capabilities become a reality. Each society will decide for itself where to draw the line on human genetic engineering, but we can expect a diversity of perspectives. Almost certainly, some countries will allow genetic engineering, thereby opening the door for global elites who can afford to travel for access to reproductive technology. As with most technologies, the rich and powerful will be the first beneficiaries. Eventually, though, I believe many countries will not only legalize human genetic engineering, but even make it a (voluntary) part of their national healthcare systems. The alternative would be inequality of a kind never before experienced in human history.
>A positional good benefits you only because others lack it. Height may be an advantage in men, but if everybody were three inches taller, nobody would be better off. Attractiveness may be another example of a positional good. A gain for one person implies a relative loss for others. I would contrast that with a trait like health. Your life is better when you are healthy, even if others are also healthy. Cognitive enhancements are a complex topic, but they have aspects that are intrinsically valuable. It is good if we can understand the world better.
https://www.nickbostrom.com/ethics/genetic.html

>>12307884
Genetic engineering could offer us the chance of ensuring that all our children are born free from genetic diseases, be born healthy, fit and smart. Their life quality should be in our focus and not the idea that they are superhuman but that genetic engineering is the next level of vaccination. With it you could give future humans greater potential of choice, all talents avaible and enabled with a greater degree of freedom.
The technology might need a decade or two to get all potential pitfalls fixed but it could be utilized right now. It wouldn`t wonder me if some black clinics are modifying people right now. The thing with CRISPR is that you don`t cause side effects (science.sciencemag.org/content/early/2017/10/24/science.aaq0180), you need of course understand the workings of the gene allells but once we have advanced enough to be to edit 10k loci reliably we would be able to safly make genetic changes with effects that would be big enough to make a distinction between gene modified and baselines appearable.

There will be massive social consequences, if everyone is a born genius, has a olympic physique and don`t have to worry about getting ill until hitting 100 years, that will make changes necessary but not necessarily negative ones. I`m less afraid of its implementation in democratic societies and more worried about the potential abuses that will occur in dictatorships. Super-soldiers would be the least of our worriest.

>>12227697
Chinese have genetically modified 3 children to have a somewhat enhanced intelligence (https://www.technologyreview.com/2019/02/21/137309/the-crispr-twins-had-their-brains-altered/)) and they only played with one DNA. If we add BCI, nanosymbionts to genetic augmentation then I am optimistic about hte human future.

What is the status of human enhancements? How far are we, how far will we be in a decade or three? Can we already genetically modify children to not develop genetically caused personality disorders like schizophrenia or psychopathy? How many genetic diseases can we cure, could we pre-natally prevent Down-Syndrom or could we already modify our children to have a decreased chance of ever developing cancer or alzheimer? How far are we from true augments?

>>11915160
GRAIN

>>11792193
The corresponding ethical issues of genetic engineering are complex and deserve serious attention in what may be a relatively short interval before these capabilities become a reality. Each society will decide for itself where to draw the line on human genetic engineering, but we can expect a diversity of perspectives. Almost certainly, some countries will allow genetic engineering, thereby opening the door for global elites who can afford to travel for access to reproductive technology. As with most technologies, the rich and powerful will be the first beneficiaries. Eventually, though, I believe many countries will not only legalize human genetic engineering, but even make it a (voluntary) part of their national healthcare systems. The alternative would be inequality of a kind never before experienced in human history. I believe that in the end all will benefit from such universal program, guaranteeing everyone being born healthy, fit and intelligent. The question is for what should we use genetic engineering, and I refer to that the question that we should only augment the potential towards non-positional traits.
A positional good benefits you only because others lack it. Height may be an advantage in men, but if everybody were three inches taller, nobody would be better off. Attractiveness may be another example of a positional good. A gain for one person implies a relative loss for others. I would contrast that with a trait like health. Your life is better when you are healthy, even if others are also healthy. Cognitive enhancements are a complex topic, but they have aspects that are intrinsically valuable. It is good if we can understand the world better. Arguments against positional goods are no arguments against enhancements as such.

>>11416255
>eugenics may pose a solution to a problem current humanity suffers from.
Eugenics is outdated. Genetic engineering is far more precise, powerful, adaptable and requires no totalitarian state. And we already have the tools for it, we only require 10 to 20 years to be able to safely implement it on a societal scale. To prevent any social crisis, genetic augmented elite vs poor masses, I argue in favour of a public health system that ensures that everyone gets the benefits of genetic engineering.
https://arxiv.org/abs/1408.3421

What kind of genetic modification should we allow for humans? Should we only use genetic engineering for health? Or should we also use it to enhance one's fitness, intelligence or perception? What about modifying a child's personality or para human adaptations?

>>11309842
The focus of transhumanism is transforming the human condition for the better through technological means. Two thousand years ago, being able to replace a missing leg with a functional replacement was not a part of the human condition. Now it can be, thanks to technology. Living with poor eyesight used to be a part of the human condition, now it is not. Cancer was a part of the human condition and we're hoping to eliminate that with a little more effort and research. It used to be a part of the human condition that no one could possibly live over the age of a hundred years. Not anymore. It used to be a part of the human condition that infant mortality had a rate of 30-50%. Not anymore. All of the things that were once part and parcel of being human are suddenly not, and this is a good thing.

Ground-level, realistic transhumanism is focused on continuing to improve the human condition. I'd like to live to see the first man or woman comfortably live to the age of a hundred and fifty before I die, something that's impossible for humanity as we know it today. I want to see genetic disease exterminated, something that always has a chance in the modern world. I want a lot of the horrible little things that we have to deal with as human beings to disappear, thanks to the aid of technology. Perhaps once these biggest problems have been eliminated, we can turn to those loftier, more questionable 'problems' that transhumanism in science fiction tackles. But that's a long way from the present and that's not all that transhumanism is.

We are already using genetic engineering to prevent genetic diseases in babies. In the future it will be used to decrease the probability for humans to fall victim to cancer or alzheimer, amybe even immunization will be used. This is will be a gradual process that will culuminate in the accepatance of using gene modification to increase intelligence. In a century and half parahuman might be created to augment ones's child potential beyond human possibilities.

>>10181050
Nature makes around 70-80% who we are.
https://arxiv.org/pdf/1408.3421.pdf