Lets allow genetic engineering for humans

[AncientSpaceAeon]

Thanks for the info Monolithic, now I think I rather should tell everyone here to study more.

 

But I still don't agree with the genetic engineering. Because there's more risk than the positive effects (that's only healing).

[Vagrant0]

And using hypnosis to improve intelligence is impossible. Hypnosis' applications include pain management and weight loss, but improving intelligence via hypnosis is inconceivable.

Not necessarily true. You can certainly convince people to think they are more intelligent, learn big words, and use them frequently. It works well enough for most College professors. Most of it is just confidence and being able to support the claims being made.

[AncientSpaceAeon]

A few hours ago I agree with Monolithic, but now I don't. Maybe we use 100% of our brain, but the conscious brain is only a part of it. Despite our intelligence maybe not so great, but at full potential we humans can try, maybe we don't need to use genetic engineering for it. For me the brain is like a hard disk with a capacity of 900.000 terrabyte (at least I think so, or maybe alot more), but not all of it filled.

 

But I don't really think I was right this time.

[Vagrant0]

A few hours ago I agree with Monolithic, but now I don't. Maybe we use 100% of our brain, but the conscious brain is only a part of it. Despite our intelligence maybe not so great, but at full potential we humans can try, maybe we don't need to use genetic engineering for it. For me the brain is like a hard disk with a capacity of 900.000 terrabyte (at least I think so, or maybe alot more), but not all of it filled.

 

But I don't really think I was right this time.

Well, not exactly. People tend to forget that the brain isn't just responsible for the obvious thinking and remembering, but also handles all motor and most biological functions, constantly adapts for new memory and stimulus, and maintains several processes which are constantly reading, caching, and writing data. All the while, being able to react to any sudden change instantly. Most of those subconscious process are what is necessary to make you, you. Sure, you could use all that space for conscious processes, but you'd probably have the personality of a steamed cabbage and get really tired of having to manually regulate your own body temperature, bloodpressure, heartrate, and gastric functions just to keep on living. Just because it's there and you can't normally take charge of it doesn't mean it's going to waste. Even those parts that do go to waste (such as losing sight) often end up being re-used for other things.

[Monolithic0117]

A few hours ago I agree with Monolithic, but now I don't. Maybe we use 100% of our brain, but the conscious brain is only a part of it. Despite our intelligence maybe not so great, but at full potential we humans can try, maybe we don't need to use genetic engineering for it. For me the brain is like a hard disk with a capacity of 900.000 terrabyte (at least I think so, or maybe alot more), but not all of it filled.

 

But I don't really think I was right this time.

Well, not exactly. People tend to forget that the brain isn't just responsible for the obvious thinking and remembering, but also handles all motor and most biological functions, constantly adapts for new memory and stimulus, and maintains several processes which are constantly reading, caching, and writing data. All the while, being able to react to any sudden change instantly. Most of those subconscious process are what is necessary to make you, you. Sure, you could use all that space for conscious processes, but you'd probably have the personality of a steamed cabbage and get really tired of having to manually regulate your own body temperature, bloodpressure, heartrate, and gastric functions just to keep on living. Just because it's there and you can't normally take charge of it doesn't mean it's going to waste. Even those parts that do go to waste (such as losing sight) often end up being re-used for other things.

 

In short - allocating brain processes such as the sensory systems to mental functions won't end well.

 

Not necessarily true. You can certainly convince people to think they are more intelligent, learn big words, and use them frequently. It works well enough for most College professors. Most of it is just confidence and being able to support the claims being made.

 

Indeed, but intellect is not actually being enhanced - hypnotherapy just places people in a beneficial state of mind. The extent to which that state "boosts" intelligence is limited.

[AncientSpaceAeon]

Ok, I don't know that I understand all of the posts above (still 13 years old). Thanks for the info anyway.

[rbrophy2]

Ok, I don't know that I understand all of the posts above (still 13 years old). Thanks for the info anyway.

im 12 and i understand it fine (then agsain i have an iq of 120...)

[AncientSpaceAeon]

Ok, I don't know that I understand all of the posts above (still 13 years old). Thanks for the info anyway.

im 12 and i understand it fine (then agsain i have an iq of 120...)

I meant I don't understand all of it. But their answers are clear. (sorry for being off-topic)

[Nadin]

With some stipulations, of course, as to avoid certain ethical issues that no one likes very much. But first, the why of it. There are a number of paths I could follow to support the proposition, Ill just choose one.

 

Almost all creatures employ their own natural abilities to the fullest of their potential in order to survive and reproduce.

 

The application of a species natural abilities to the fullest of their potential generates the most good for that species. (here good only means what most of us would intuitively consider as the greatest benefits with the least detriments. This would be true even if these abilities werent enough to save a species from extinction.)

 

Humans commonly desire the greatest good possible on an individual basis as well as for all humanity in many cases, and much individual benefit can be derived from the most good for all humans, and vice-versa.

 

So Humans ought to employ their own natural abilities to the fullest of their potential in order to achieve that end.

 

Part of doing that would be to allow genetic engineering to stifle negative traits and promote positive ones, something we are capable of doing as a result of our own natural abilities.

 

Therefore, we ought to allow genetic engineering.

 

Now for the stipulations, which I add at the end only as my own personal feelings about the matter. Since the argument obviously doesnt touch them at all and I think they are needed to protect and preserve certain values I (and many others) possess.

 

Only the engineering of traits which inherently contribute either to the detriment or benefit of an individual should be allowed. So changing eye color, hair color, sexual orientation, etc. would not be allowed. Those things do not inherently contribute to either the detriment or benefit of any individual. They are neutral traits. The only time they do cause detriment or benefit is under certain social conditions. Most of which, if not all, are arbitrary.

 

However, things such as intellect, physical strength, speed, and stamina, as well as a strong immune system are all inherently beneficial to all individuals. While things such as down syndrome, and other genetic disorders are things that do not contribute to the benefit of any individual, and often cause a great deal of detriment to those who suffer from them. These are the sorts of things on which genetic alterations/manipulations should be allowed to be performed.

 

I see no immediately apparent ethical issues with this stance. Any disagreement/agreements?

Oh hell yes. I study genetics and have this to say:

Thank you.

Thank you for having a brain.

[Nadin]

Ok, I don't know that I understand all of the posts above (still 13 years old). Thanks for the info anyway.

I'm twelve and I get it. Just study genetics. Even the simplified textbooks are useful.

 

@rbrophy, I.Q. has about jack poo to do with intelligence. It's a (very rough) estimate of how much you have the capacity to learn, not your ability to comprehend. You confusing your virtual memory with your display driver, in other words.

Sorry...I just feel the need to point that out to everyone who messes it up.

And, as I read the previous posts AFTER replying,

The conscious mind can process about 300 megs at any given time.

The rest can(and does) process hundreds of gigabytes.