http://www.technologyreview.com/news/53 ... an-embryo/

What are your thoughts on the moral implications? What happens when a portion of the population has tailored DNA, and the rest don't. Discrimination?

Interbne wrote:
What are your thoughts on the moral implications? What happens when a portion of the population has tailored DNA, and the rest don't. Discrimination?

It might be rather difficult t moralize something that maybe inevitable, Artificial gene manipulation seems like a logical next step in medical treatment for all sorts of illnesses or birth defects, The immediate outcome maybe rules to prevent commercial use of gene manipulation as a treatment technique but that wont stop experimentation. It may seem reprehensible now, but maybe a future generation will think we were too nescient.

A new class system would be created. that system would eventually if not immediately discriminate against those that were not in its system.

The conformity to certain characteristics would discriminate and or destroy the diversity that nature is so good at creating.

Of course the ability to prevent predisposition to particular diseases would be beneficial.
But who gets the benefit of that? Only people that can afford it?

ant wrote:Of course the ability to prevent predisposition to particular diseases would be beneficial.
But who gets the benefit of that? Only people that can afford it?

I'm sure it would be prohibitively expensive. I don't know if it would create a new class. I think it would further separate existing classes. Only rich people will have genetically flawless offspring. One more wedge in the gap.

Only rich people will have genetically flawless offspring. One more wedge in the gap.

But who gets the benefit of that? Only people that can afford it?

I'm not so certain that a wealthy class would be willing to go all in on experimental treatments, until a confirmed process is vetted by experimentation on the poor or desperate.

I should add that wealth classes can be poor in thought and equally desperate as a people can be. A system that would compensate for the consideration of class station should really be the goal.

Speaking of discrimination; if physical weakness's are bread from the genome, What dictates would these supers humans be allowed to hold over the heads of naturally designed people, Seems it would be difficult avoiding discrimination from being perpetrated by any group that feels slighted, I think Ants point does have legs, An invented class adds to a strained and paranoid populous.

I, for one, welcome our new intellectual and genetic overlords!

After the point where testing shows positive results, and is sustainable, it will be accepted by those who can afford it. I could see the main difference being that all wealthy people are beautiful and rich(none are ugly but those who were born poor), 100 years from now. So the discrimination that results wouldn't be much different from a beautiful person's disdain of an ugly person. Or the snobbery of a man in a Lamborghini towards the unkempt bum in a Honda Civic. Or the tall person towards the short person.

In many cases, the assumed arrogance or disdain isn't really there, but in many cases, it is. Same with racial or religious discrimination. It exists, but only in a portion of the pool.

Unless the genetically optimized individuals get a star printed on their foreheads, it would be impossible to tell the difference short of a gene test.

What would be interesting is if the most desired genetic alterations also rendered people unable to mate with the "naturals". Give that scenario a hundred years, and we'd have a true master/slave society.

Taylor wrote:Speaking of discrimination; if physical weakness's are bread from the genome, What dictates would these supers humans be allowed to hold over the heads of naturally designed people, Seems it would be difficult avoiding discrimination from being perpetrated by any group that feels slighted, I think Ants point does have legs, An invented class adds to a strained and paranoid populous.

Sometimes sci-fi is able to anticipate/prognosticate sociological, moral dilemmas.
What came to mind was Star Trek's eugenic wars/optimum movement.

It's not very hard to imagine the rise of a class of people genetically engineered to be physically and intellectually advantaged. That class of people would most certainly discriminate against those who are not their genetic equals.

Unless the genetically optimized individuals get a star printed on their foreheads, it would be impossible to tell the difference short of a gene test.

Not necessarily.

How tall are you?
Are you average looking, a bit below average looking, or extremely attractive?

Before you get all flush because you think I'm hitting on you, here's the point:

Who wouldn't want to be taller with looks that made you clearly distinguishable from the average person?

What if engineered people were clearly distinguishable from us "average" people just on looks alone?
What if memory retention and calculation abilities were superior as well.

Guess what?
You'd be able to tell the difference without a star on a forehead or a test in a lab

does superior genetics also mean superior ethics/morals?