Ethical Ramifications of Genetic Engineering

[Zkribbler]

Background:
I was watching a National Geographic Television show on colonization of planets in other star systems. The show postulated that once the colonists arrived, they'd find a target planet would probably have unexpected characteristics (low oxygen, too cold), and that these conditions woud required the colonists to make genetic alterations in any children which were born.

The show pointed out that already a scientist has transferred a gene from a jellyfish to mice which causes the mice to glow in the dark. Thus colonist might increase the lung capacity of future generations, provide them with a couple of extra layers of fat for insulation, etc. On each planet that we colonize, the human species will be intentionally mutated.

This got me thinking as to what may happen back here on ol' planet Earth.

Let's say genetic engineers take elephant embryos and alter them to give the resulting uber-elephants an upright bipedal posure, human hands and a human or near-human intelligence. These uber-elephants would be great workers: smart and very strong.

But would they be considered human? Would killing them be murder or merely destruction of property? They are as smart as us (or nearly as smart), so would the get to vote? Could President Jenna Bush appoint one to the Supreme Court? If they are merely property, to be treated as slaves, what will their reactions be?

[Wycoff]

That goes right along with the classic ethical question: Humans eat other species for food. E.T. and Chewbacca are other species. Would it be o.k. to eat E.T. and/or Chewbacca?

[Sava]

if we were smart enough to make elephants that could do work and stuff, couldn't we make them docile so that such dilemnas are avoided?


Wycoff: ET doesn't have much meat on his bones, and Chewbacca looks like he'd be stringy. Plus, Chewbacca is the name of a specific wookie, not a species. I think ET is also just an individual and not referring to an entire species.


I had an idea. Would it be possible to genetically engineer an orginasm that "grows" meat? Basically, a plant, or brainless version or an animal that can be used to harvest meat for consumption?

I think this would be worth researching.

It would solve a lot of the ethical problems dealing with eating meat that some people have. We wouldn't have to worry about animal abuse when it comes to animal products (including meat).

Anyone know if this is just science fiction or is something like this possible with Genetic Engineering?

[Dis]

I see no ethical ramifications. It's mostly a religious issue.

But there could be societal ramifications. If the rich could engineer their children to be stronger smarter etc. How will this affect society. Eventually we could reach a point where the rich aren't human as the poor people are. They would be like neanderthals compared to modern man.

The above example applies mostly to human modifications. As for animal modifications. It's less of a religious issue, as they would not be considered humans by the religious fanatics. But the Peta's and pacifists would be up in arms about eating them. But why would you create an intelligent animal just to eat? That's a waste. We currently engineer animals to be fatter and bigger, not be more intelligent. Intelligent animals we would use as bomb sniffing dogs and the like. And the life of a bomb sniffing dog isn't bad.

[Sandman]

Let's say genetic engineers take elephant embryos and alter them to give the resulting uber-elephants an upright bipedal posure, human hands and a human or near-human intelligence. These uber-elephants would be great workers: smart and very strong.

Why do you think they'd make great workers? Strength isn't useful. And their intelligence would be that of a retarded human.

I had an idea. Would it be possible to genetically engineer an orginasm that "grows" meat? Basically, a plant, or brainless version or an animal that can be used to harvest meat for consumption?

You don't need genetic engineering for this. Just culture muscle tissue in a lab. Currently, it's possible to produce something that resembles very expensive spam.

[Narz]

I had an idea. Would it be possible to genetically engineer an orginasm that "grows" meat? Basically, a plant, or brainless version or an animal that can be used to harvest meat for consumption?

This is possible, there was a link to an article awhile back about this on CFC.

I personal applaud that effort, factory farming of animals is one of the biggest environmental drains in the modern world.

Interesting thread by the way, I think any genetically modified being with even close to human intelligence should get full human rights.

[Cyclotron]

So what, in your mind, would let us know whether it was close to human intelligence? Is language required? Do dolphins or higher apes count?

[Sava]

well...

if such a being was created...

I think it should be granted such rights only if it could demonstrate that it deserved such rights...

so basically, it would be brought to testify in court or something... I dunno what the procedure would be... but I'm sure there would be testing and court procedings.

If it was proven that it could reason and think like a human being, I don't see why it should not be treated any different than a human.

[Narz]

Originally posted by Cyclotron
So what, in your mind, would let us know whether it was close to human intelligence? Is language required? Do dolphins or higher apes count?

Any species that we create that has an intelligence level on par with an autistic person should have human rights. If it (he or she) cannot function for itself (provide for it's own basic needs as many disabled and ill adults cannot) it's creator or owner should be help legally responsible for it's actions.

[Cyclotron]

Originally posted by Narz
Any species that we create that has an intelligence level on par with an autistic person should have human rights. If it (he or she) cannot function for itself (provide for it's own basic needs as many disabled and ill adults cannot) it's creator or owner should be help legally responsible for it's actions.

- How would it communicate intelligence if it lacks language?
- Most animals can function for themselves, but we do not consider them to have an intelligence on par with our own. My cat can "function for himself," but I don't think he is entitled to basic human rights.

[Bill3000]

I don't think genetic engineering is needed as a theme for this; this is more about where exactly do we consider other species to be "equal" to us, or entitled to the same rights as humanity. It's probably more likely for a sentient AI to be created before another sentient organism, IMO, but the main question still stands.

Other than the fact that I am such a radical technocrat that I do not believe in using ethics at all to avoid hampering progressto science, I'd say when a species is sentient, but the problem is defining what exactly is "sentient." And even so, it's still an anthropocentric principle to consider humans superior to other organisms. Who says that there is not a form of sentience that is completely alien to us, for example?

[Zkribbler]

Originally posted by Sava
if we were smart enough to make elephants that could do work and stuff, couldn't we make them docile so that such dilemnas are avoided?

Good point.

I had an idea. Would it be possible to genetically engineer an orginasm that "grows" meat? Basically, a plant, or brainless version or an animal that can be used to harvest meat for consumption?

I think this would be worth researching.

Awhile back, I had a similar idea. A mindless creature that "eats" sunlight at one end and grows a long tube of flesh on the other. The tube has no tactile nerves, so you can slice off a piece of meat without causing it any pain.

Anyone know if this is just science fiction or is something like this possible with Genetic Engineering?

It's not science yet, but coming soon. My opening paragraphs decribe the experiment where a scientist genetically engineered mice with a jellyfish gene so that they glow in the dark. The same principle could be used in my hypothesis, but no one's come close to doing it yet.

[Cyclotron]

Originally posted by Bill3000
And even so, it's still an anthropocentric principle to consider humans superior to other organisms. Who says that there is not a form of sentience that is completely alien to us, for example?

I don't consider sentience to be a thing that has "forms." What exactly do you mean?

[Cyclotron]

Originally posted by Zkribbler
Awhile back, I had a similar idea. A mindless creature that "eats" sunlight at one end and grows a long tube of flesh on the other. The tube has no tactile nerves, so you can slice off a piece of meat without causing it any pain.

Tube steak

[Bill3000]

I don't consider sentience to be a thing that has "forms." What exactly do you mean?

Take the Zerg, as an example.