First  Prev  1  2  Next  Last
Controlled Evolution
Posted 8/22/08 , edited 8/22/08

- Should we really mess with the natural process, evolution?

I think we should and eventually will. This experiment can be successful if it's put under careful obeservation.

- Do you think that there will be a consequence if you mess with the natural order of things?

Probably

- Insert something here that is of this subject. Religion, philosophy, naturalism, luck, etc.

Here's part of the introduction to "THE WISDOM OF NATURE: AN EVOLUTIONARY HEURISTIC FOR HUMAN ENHANCEMENT" by Nick Bostrom and Anders Sandberg


- Just for fun. What part of you would you want to modify? Come now, you can't lie. We all have something that we want to change.

Well it would be nice to have wings.
757 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M / United States
Offline
Posted 8/22/08

zendude wrote:

Well, as you know, we now have the technology to manipulate genes and correct "GOD's" mistakes.

The questions are:
- Should really mess with the natural process, evolution?
- Do you think that there will be a consequence if you mess with the natural order of things?
- Modified humans, Homo Sapien Modus Genea, will many ethical issues.
For example:
Humans can be modified to be superior at everything, now with genetic engineering we can literally make a real dolphin man, better than Michael (too much Olympics for me), or even make sex slaves (ahem, the Japanese will probably do this [forgive me for stereotyping]). And lastly, super soldiers.
- Insert something here that is of this subject. Religion, philosophy, naturalism, luck, etc.
- Just for fun. What would you want to modify? Come now, you can't lie. We all have something that we want to change.

I just had to post this:


1. We should, but a careful and extended study is needed; and we might have philosophy barrier to solve
2. it has and it always will
3. modified humans huh? I'll think about it (hasn't yet)
4. -
5. modify? hmm.... a biological computer maybe? lol.

2750 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
F / England
Offline
Posted 8/22/08
oo, personally i think itd just be a bit creepy.

Btw do you mean humans creating dna and artificial life lala? :S cause i asked my bio teacher if it was possible and he said it would be pretty dangerous lol?!
4439 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
30 / M / New Jersey
Offline
Posted 8/22/08
ok i think its a good thing if used to cure diseases . it would help improve the overall heath of the world.
but this would be better used on plants and animals. to help with medication and food supplies
963 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / M
Offline
Posted 8/22/08

zendude wrote:

Well, as you know, we now have the technology to manipulate genes and correct "GOD's" mistakes.

The questions are:
- Should really mess with the natural process, evolution?
- Do you think that there will be a consequence if you mess with the natural order of things?
- Modified humans, Homo Sapien Modus Genea, will cause many ethical issues.
For example:
Humans can be modified to be superior at everything, now with genetic engineering we can literally make a real dolphin man, better than Michael Phelps (too much Olympics for me), or even make sex slaves (ahem, the Japanese will probably do this [forgive me for stereotyping]). And lastly, super soldiers.
- Insert something here that is of this subject. Religion, philosophy, naturalism, luck, etc.
- Just for fun. What would you want to modify (yourself or other things)? Come now, you can't lie. We all have something that we want to change.


if you think about it, we are a natural process, so its all just natural process lolz and i say its okey as long as we do it right.
i dont think there will be any plagues or disasters if we mess with dna (but maybe lol).
the ethical issues, hmm, as long as no one gets hurt i guess its kwl.

"Humans can be modified to be superior at everything"
everything is a broad word, plus we have loads more to develope in this field. i think that if we made anything interesting the relgious dudes would have a riot, so i doubt there will be any superhumans, willing sex slaves or mutants for a long time
theres also the issue of these things being classed as human, i mean a guy with wings is not that human to me lolz, and if you can somehow change human condition eg create some immortal breed, could you realy class them as humans anymore?.





5137 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
22 / M / SPARTAAAAAAAAAAAA...
Offline
Posted 8/22/08
is this a joke topic
963 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / M
Offline
Posted 8/22/08 , edited 8/22/08

zendude wrote:


simo2332 wrote:


zendude wrote:

Well, as you know, we now have the technology to manipulate genes and correct "GOD's" mistakes.

The questions are:
- Should really mess with the natural process, evolution?
- Do you think that there will be a consequence if you mess with the natural order of things?
- Modified humans, Homo Sapien Modus Genea, will cause many ethical issues.
For example:
Humans can be modified to be superior at everything, now with genetic engineering we can literally make a real dolphin man, better than Michael Phelps (too much Olympics for me), or even make sex slaves (ahem, the Japanese will probably do this [forgive me for stereotyping]). And lastly, super soldiers.
- Insert something here that is of this subject. Religion, philosophy, naturalism, luck, etc.
- Just for fun. What would you want to modify (yourself or other things)? Come now, you can't lie. We all have something that we want to change.


if you think about it, we are a natural process, so its all just natural process lolz and i say its okey as long as we do it right.
i dont think there will be any plagues or disasters if we mess with dna (but maybe lol).
the ethical issues, hmm, as long as no one gets hurt i guess its kwl.

"Humans can be modified to be superior at everything"
everything is a broad word, plus we have loads more to develope in this field. i think that if we made anything interesting the relgious dudes would have a riot, so i doubt there will be any superhumans, willing sex slaves or mutants for a long time
theres also the issue of these things being classed as human, i mean a guy with wings is not that human to me lolz, and if you can somehow change human condition eg create some immortal breed, could you realy class them as humans anymore?.



I haven't seen you here in a while.

I am not talking about the wrath of "GOD," though it maybe a possibility. I am saying that there might be a possibility of a "Self-Correcting Gene" within our genome, like the ones in the first development of fetuses. If we mess up one thing, it might affect some many other things.

Anyways, lets see when we get there.


yeah sorry ive been lazy ^_^ and i think that if the gene did get in the way, we would probably get around, or just completely scrap it from the experiments genome.

i wanna see some artificial intelligence in the future an yeah have to wait.
Posted 8/22/08
I don't know honestly. With this, we could evolve so much so quick, and could make life so much better. But taking away natural selection, all humans will get good gene's, then over population....problems etc etc.

I guess the con's outweigh the pro's.
757 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M / United States
Offline
Posted 8/22/08

dmitsuki wrote:

I don't know honestly. With this, we could evolve so much so quick, and could make life so much better. But taking away natural selection, all humans will get good gene's, then over population....problems etc etc.

I guess the con's outweigh the pro's.


making manipulation in gens might be also part of natural selection.
Posted 8/22/08

tweety_cool wrote:


dmitsuki wrote:

I don't know honestly. With this, we could evolve so much so quick, and could make life so much better. But taking away natural selection, all humans will get good gene's, then over population....problems etc etc.

I guess the con's outweigh the pro's.


making manipulation in gens might be also part of natural selection.


No, because changing something with your hands is not natural. Natural selection, survival of the fittest, whatever you want to call it, is not making everything equally fit, its letting nature take its course and kill off the weak.
757 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M / United States
Offline
Posted 8/22/08

dmitsuki wrote:


tweety_cool wrote:


dmitsuki wrote:

I don't know honestly. With this, we could evolve so much so quick, and could make life so much better. But taking away natural selection, all humans will get good gene's, then over population....problems etc etc.

I guess the con's outweigh the pro's.


making manipulation in gens might be also part of natural selection.


No, because changing something with your hands is not natural. Natural selection, survival of the fittest, whatever you want to call it, is not making everything equally fit, its letting nature take its course and kill off the weak.


is human not part of nature? what we do is part of nature. The gen that is good for us is the fittest; therefore they survive. The agent of natural selection can be anything.
Posted 8/22/08

tweety_cool wrote:


dmitsuki wrote:


tweety_cool wrote:


dmitsuki wrote:

I don't know honestly. With this, we could evolve so much so quick, and could make life so much better. But taking away natural selection, all humans will get good gene's, then over population....problems etc etc.

I guess the con's outweigh the pro's.


making manipulation in gens might be also part of natural selection.


No, because changing something with your hands is not natural. Natural selection, survival of the fittest, whatever you want to call it, is not making everything equally fit, its letting nature take its course and kill off the weak.


is human not part of nature? what we do is part of nature. The gen that is good for us is the fittest; therefore they survive. The agent of natural selection can be anything.


Humans are a part of nature, human creations and alterations are NOT a part of nature. It's like if we make a device that controls the weather, it natural if we just let it go and do what it was supposed to do untouched, but if we, or anything messes with that, its no longer natural, but controlled. Something that is going to be natural cannot be controlled, I can control when you die, but I cannot control when you die naturally.
757 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M / United States
Offline
Posted 8/22/08 , edited 8/22/08

zendude wrote:


tweety_cool wrote:


dmitsuki wrote:


tweety_cool wrote:


dmitsuki wrote:

I don't know honestly. With this, we could evolve so much so quick, and could make life so much better. But taking away natural selection, all humans will get good gene's, then over population....problems etc etc.

I guess the con's outweigh the pro's.


making manipulation in gens might be also part of natural selection.


No, because changing something with your hands is not natural. Natural selection, survival of the fittest, whatever you want to call it, is not making everything equally fit, its letting nature take its course and kill off the weak.


is human not part of nature? what we do is part of nature. The gen that is good for us is the fittest; therefore they survive. The agent of natural selection can be anything.


dmitsuki is wrong. It is "Survival of the Luckiest" rather than the "Fittest."


LOL, yeah. the fittest might be the luckiest.

@dmitsuki

Human are part of nature, and so the behavior are also part of nature. You might think we control them, but we are controlled by the fact that we need something of that genes. Humans are not the only creature that " try to control" nature, yet we only recognized ourselves as the only one who manipulate. At large scale, we are and what we are doing are part of natural selection.
Posted 8/22/08

zendude wrote:


tweety_cool wrote:


dmitsuki wrote:


tweety_cool wrote:


dmitsuki wrote:

I don't know honestly. With this, we could evolve so much so quick, and could make life so much better. But taking away natural selection, all humans will get good gene's, then over population....problems etc etc.

I guess the con's outweigh the pro's.


making manipulation in gens might be also part of natural selection.


No, because changing something with your hands is not natural. Natural selection, survival of the fittest, whatever you want to call it, is not making everything equally fit, its letting nature take its course and kill off the weak.


is human not part of nature? what we do is part of nature. The gen that is good for us is the fittest; therefore they survive. The agent of natural selection can be anything.


dmitsuki is wrong. It is "Survival of the Luckiest" rather than the "Fittest."

The luckiest to be the fittest.
First  Prev  1  2  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.