"Life, will find a way..."

[Livewire]

Inspired by Jurassic Park.

[h2][/h2]In the movie, Scientists are able to genetically re-create and re-engineer extinct species of Dinosaurs from DNA embedded in fossilized amber. The scientists, however, in their arrogance, assume that they have mastered nature, and they can control the revived beasts. They were bred missing Lysine, a critical protein for development, and the scientists used frog DNA to fill in the missing DNA information, but these frogs possessed an ability to change genders if the environment couldn't provide both of them, as an evolutionary defense to prevent extinction. And they ran rampant on Isla Sorna afterwards.

Does mankind dabble in similar issues when it comes to mother nature, and genetic engineering? Are there things we really aren't meant to dabble in, from an "ethical" and "moral standpoint"? Are we "playing God" by doing these sorts of things? Or should we pursue any and all scientific advances to better our society and way of life?

Discuss.

 

[Zeffy]

You can't stop mankind from progressing. They always want to pursue what they want to do, always trying to prove their point, always trying to make something new. Yes, we are sort of "playing God" by doing this but progress is always there. Someday, people will start to dabble with things that haven't been touched before.

In my opinion, trying to stop humanity from pursuing scientific breakthroughs is like stopping a volcano from erupting. Its not possible, there is always a way. Of course, some scientific advantages would help us some would just make our life end easier.

 

[Rich Boy Rob]

I think the only way to progress is to take risks. If they go awry then you just have to learn from that mistake and keep going until "the science gets done and you make a neat gun, for the people who are still alive."
Portal quotes aside, I do think we need to take risks in science. For example, you're never truly going to know whether that vaccine you just created is going to work until you go ahead and give it to someone to see.
As for "playing god" I don't think that is so bad. If the experiment serves a good purpose then I see no reason why it shouldn't go ahead. A good example would be the stem cell research controversy, it could lead to new ways of curing countless ailments, but some people say it is "wrong" simply because it involves storing human embryos.

 

[Ces soirees-la]

I find cloning to be playing god a little, and messing with nature, it's just strange that someone out there might be identical to me in the future, it's just unearthly, to have the exact same looks, personality and genetic make up.

 

[Esper]

"Playing God" isn't a bad thing when you're developing something helpful like organ transplants and other life-saving "miracles" of science. There's probably very little that is outright harmful. It's the application of a lot of technology that's the problem, like how we as a species learned so much about chemistry and biology and physics... and then went and made nuclear and biological weapons. And yet we also made satellites and vaccines and those have made our lives better. We shouldn't avoid scientific discovery, but we need to make sure that we apply our knowledge in responsible ways and if we know that some people aren't going to be responsible with their knowledge (ie., North Korea) then we shouldn't let them have that knowledge if it's within our power to keep it from them.

 

[Livewire]

"Playing God" isn't a bad thing when you're developing something helpful like organ transplants and other life-saving "miracles" of science. There's probably very little that is outright harmful. It's the application of a lot of technology that's the problem, like how we as a species learned so much about chemistry and biology and physics... and then went and made nuclear and biological weapons. And yet we also made satellites and vaccines and those have made our lives better. We shouldn't avoid scientific discovery, but we need to make sure that we apply our knowledge in responsible ways and if we know that some people aren't going to be responsible with their knowledge (ie., North Korea) then we shouldn't let them have that knowledge if it's within our power to keep it from them.

I agree with this. Imagine a world without Heart disease or Cancer. But you're right, there needs to be responsible development in order to make sure we don't destroy ourselves with powerful weapons, from Nuclear to Biological. And it needs to be policed heavily - North Korea doesn't need to be in on the game.

 

[twocows]

Considering I'm atheist, I think it's all rubbish. I'm for wherever science brings us, so long as it doesn't hurt people. Even direct human cloning, an issue that's generally brought up as "unethical," doesn't hurt anyone, so I don't see any problem with it.

I'm completely tolerant of most forms of religion, but I'm not tolerant of people holding back progress because of their personal beliefs. If you are opposed to an advancement, don't use it. Trying to make it illegal is unethical. If you want an example of a group of people staying true to their beliefs without imposing their will on others, take a look at the Amish. They manage to stay true to their religious beliefs and are on pretty good terms with the rest of us.

 

[Shining Raichu]

I'm completely tolerant of most forms of religion, but I'm not tolerant of people holding back progress because of their personal beliefs. If you are opposed to an advancement, don't use it. Trying to make it illegal is unethical. If you want an example of a group of people staying true to their beliefs without imposing their will on others, take a look at the Amish. They manage to stay true to their religious beliefs and are on pretty good terms with the rest of us.

This. I think there are valid arguments for it being an unethical practice in some instances, but "God says no" is not one of them. We're past that.

I like the idea of prolonging life and curing disease, but when we get into cloning and whatnot I begin to get a little bit iffy, just because all the sci-fi movies make it seem like going in that direction would be a bad idea. I know it's just fiction, but still it's scary.

 

[Nihilego]

I'm not completely sure of the issue being addressed in this thread, but I'm assuming it's talking about the idea that our use or, in some cases, abuse of advancing understanding of genetics may be unethical or dangerous?

If so, then I see no issue if what we are doing, with the natural intelligence which we have evolved to have, is for the good of otherwise disadvantaged people.

That is the cutoff though. Gene therapy is fine in my books; we can cure or at least treat diseases through it. Genetic screening is fine; it helps parents make informed decisions about if they want their child or not, should something be wrong. But these "designer babies" and the like are most certainly not fine as far as I go. Why should we alter a completely fine baby, competent and healthy at birth as any other, to be 'superior' to others? Everyone is made differently, and everyone is capable of independent and unique behavior and capable of fitting into a different niche of a society. Designer babies eliminate this completely. What is life really worth if it is no more than a designed and manufactured product?

I'm aware that designer babies aren't the topic so to speak, but I wanted to use it as an example of where I think the metaphorical line is crossed.

 

[Exploding Bunny]

People will always advance into "God's realm" in science this cannot be stopped until we as a species dies off.

 

[WriteThemWrong]

It also goes both ways, even if we are able to manipulate DNA and cure cancer, "life" will find another way to do harm to us.

Any way we can make progress to eradicate harm will make our species better. There are some things that I think we just shouldn't have messed with though. Things like atom splitting. Even though it eventually lead to scientific endeavors, it was used immediately as a weapon. In cases like that I'd rather not progress if it only involves making a weapon.

 

[Livewire]

It also goes both ways, even if we are able to manipulate DNA and cure cancer, "life" will find another way to do harm to us.

Any way we can make progress to eradicate harm will make our species better. There are some things that I think we just shouldn't have messed with though. Things like atom splitting. Even though it eventually lead to scientific endeavors, it was used immediately as a weapon. In cases like that I'd rather not progress if it only involves making a weapon.

Well you have to remember that those scientific/technological benefits and uses wouldn't be possible if it wasn't developed as a weapon first, when it comes to nuclear technology. I tent to agree that some of the more advanced scientific explorations need heavy government regulation first.

 

[aruchan]

Scientific progress is often dangerous, although to varying extents. While I don't believe Genetically Engineered foods pose a threat to our health, advancements like transhumanism, genetic manipulation, designer babies, and even regeneration are unresolved future issues. Although they all have benefits, all carry risks, the foremost being the redefinition of what is human.
It's quite unlike that we will ever make anything that would constitute "playing God", but we may make a sentient AI eventually, so...
This is reminiscent of the public fear during the initiation of the Large Hadron Collider at CERN. ;p

 

[Livewire]

Scientific progress is often dangerous, although to varying extents. While I don't believe Genetically Engineered foods pose a threat to our health, advancements like transhumanism, genetic manipulation, designer babies, and even regeneration are unresolved future issues. Although they all have benefits, all carry risks, the foremost being the redefinition of what is human.
It's quite unlike that we will ever make anything that would constitute "playing God", but we may make a sentient AI eventually, so...
This is reminiscent of the public fear during the initiation of the Large Hadron Collider at CERN. ;p

Speaking of the Hadron Collider... :p

But, what is human? Such an esoteric and broad concept can't be readily defined, imo. And, as long as we can't find a concrete answer, I don't think there needs to be that sort of limitations. Designer babies, that i can understand- you'd be effectively creating a master race, a la Adolph Hitler. But I'm all for stem cell research and gene therapy, etc.

 

[Overlord Drakow]

The Hadron Collider - never expected to find it mentioned on Pokecommunity. I mentioned it briefly in my dissertation. So Livewire, there's a particular quote of mine which springs to mind when I read through this topic.

"The end result is all that matters".

As long as the end result helps to improve human healthcare or whatever, I am not too fussed about the methods being implemented to achieve said goals.