[tt] [wta-talk] ARTICLE TO DISCUSS: The Dangers of DNA Research

Wed Nov 21 07:23:51 UTC 2007

----- Forwarded message from James Clement <clementlawyer at hotmail.com> -----

From: James Clement <clementlawyer at hotmail.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2007 20:04:28 -0800
To: 'World Transhumanist Association Discussion List' <wta-talk at transhumanism.org>
Subject: [wta-talk] ARTICLE TO DISCUSS: The Dangers of DNA Research
X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0
Reply-To: World Transhumanist Association Discussion List <wta-talk at transhumanism.org>

http://stoptheaclu.com/archives/2007/11/19/the-dangers-of-dna-research/print
/

The Dangers of DNA Research

Posted By Warner Todd Huston On 19th November 2007 @ 05:37 In News | 2
Comments

The fields of DNA and gene manipulation research are incredibly exciting for
the good that it can offer mankind. Imagine a day when the results of such
research can assist mankind to treat previously untreatable diseases, maybe
even prevent them? Wouldn't it be tremendous to be able to alter the DNA of
an unborn fetus to prevent its developing spina bifida or Down's syndrome?
Wouldn't it be a Godsend if we could manipulate our genes in order to shut
off the cancer cells that ravage us or rebuild broken spinal chords? Who
would stand against such worthwhile gains in health, medicine and science?
Of course, no caring human could oppose such work. 

But that same work has its dark side and this is a subject that medical
science is doing its level best to pretend does not exist. That dark side is
not getting its due in the debate of the future of mankind through science.
Unfortunately, it is not merely something to scoff at as unlikely because,
for all our scientific knowledge, we are still, after all, men. Evil,
selfishness, hatred and ignorance will remain with us whether we are free of
cancer or know our full DNA sequence or not and those innate flaws inherent
in man has, can and will corrupt the good that his science can do. The
potential for evil is there no matter how wondrous that science can be. 

The New York Times recently published a story about this very topic.
Naturally, to further their own agenda, they only discussed a small portion
of the potential evil that could result in the misuse of DNA research and
left an awful lot of the debate unaddressed. In a story by Amy Harmon, the
Times worried only abut racial prejudices being revived by DNA research ([1]
"In DNA Era, Worries About Revival of Prejudice") as that research begins to
decode the small differences that accounts for skin color or other things
that denote racial groups. From physical characteristics to propensity for
race specific disease, DNA research is beginning to map these differences
giving hope that, at least in the case of disease, those differences might
lead to treatments and prevention. But, the Times worries that this research
might also revive discrimination based on those differences. "The notion
that race is more than skin deep," the Times reports, "could undermine
principles of equal treatment and opportunity that have relied on the
presumption that we are all fundamentally equal." 

Sadly, The Times also used its piece as an excuse to attack conservatives
and push for more welfare spending. Claiming that conservatives would use
DNA research to discriminate against blacks and, conversely, claiming that
liberals could use that same research to demand more spending to "close the
achievement gap," the Times crudely used its article as an effort to
demonize opponents instead of to truly address the real problems that the
future could bring. 

The Times is right to worry that DNA could be used by some to justify
discrimination against blacks, of course. But the length and breadth of this
issue is far more worrisome than just the narrow aspect highlighted by The
New York Times. It is, in fact, a far more dangerous potential threat to
humanity than the Times seems to grasp. This research, after all, could
easily be used to eliminate the natural human being altogether, white,
black, Asian. the entire human race is in danger of being altered beyond
nature and changed into some post human creature. 

A small and fringe group of scienceists (not scientists, but science-ists;
those who nearly worship science making a fetish of it) look upon this
research as a chance to materially alter the very human being himself by
mixing his DNA with that of the animal kingdom, creating new and unnatural
creatures, or by technologically altering the physical body in other to
create a human that is not like his ancestors. These people call their
efforts the transhumanist movement and imagine it to mean "progress" for
mankind. 

One of the organizations created to further this Hieronymus Boschian future
is [2] The World Transhumanist Association that proclaims their desire to
"improve man" with an "ethical use of technology to extend human
capabilities." This claim, however, is a smoke screen of rhetoric because in
the [3] frequently asked questions section of their website, they define
their ultimate "progress" in the following terms: 

To a transhumanist, progress occurs when more people become more able to
shape themselves, their lives, and the ways they relate to others, in
accordance with their own deepest values. 

A world where people only act in "accordance with their own deepest values,"
of course, is in stark contradiction to their claims of desiring any
"ethical use of technology to extend human capabilities." After all, how can
there be a universal understanding of "ethics" if everyone expects to live
by their own codes and values. There can be no standards, no way to assess
what is "ethical" if everyone is doing their own thing. Anarchy is the
result of their creed and that precludes any chance of determining a set of
"ethics" that might guide their actions. 

Further, how is it an ethical thing to want to so alter the human being so
as to make of him something new and different? Isn't that a planned
destruction of mankind? Isn't that the direct result of their technological
manipulations? And, who is to adjudicate when these alterations through
technology is good and right to do? Is simply wanting the alteration enough
of a justification for doing it, even if that desire would make the natural
man a thing of the past? 

Now, I bring up these fringe, extremists only to illustrate the point that
the research and technology can so easily be warped and used for evil. 

For the sake of discussion, let's imagine a future where the transhumanists
win the debate for the great majority of humanity (or post humanity as the
case may be). Is it so hard to imagine, at a point far in the future when
genetic manipulation or altering the human being to create that "better" man
becomes the norm, that the natural man could find himself discriminated
against? Perhaps even hunted as a "danger" to the "normal" people who have
been altered in whatever way has become popular at the moment? Is it so hard
to imagine that man could become so warped that this danger could become
reality? Knowing the history of humanity, a person would have to be a fool
not to realize the potential is there for such a corruption of science and
medicine. 

Let's take it further. Can we so easily dismiss the possibility that science
could offer us the capability of creating a slave race that is inferior in
mental capacity? Is it so outside the realm of possibility that we could
breed a lower race of subhumans to do our dirty work for us or is it even so
hard to believe that we might breed a race of lower creatures that could be
used for sexual pleasure? It must be remembered that slaves have served the
sexual needs of masters since time immemorial, after all. And what could
that do to our soul, our psychology? 

Would creating such a subhuman race for our pleasure be an "ethical" use of
the science in question? If not, why not? If, as the transhumanists claim,
using such science is to be left to the machinations of any particular
person "in accordance with their own deepest values," how can we logically
say that such a misuse of science would violate any ethical consideration?
If my "deepest value" posits that having a subhuman, sex slave race created
by science to serve me is a good idea, who is to tell me I'm wrong? I'd only
be living up to my individual transhumanist "ethics," after all. 

In light of Man's obvious nature, what intelligent, thinking person could
imagine that mankind's future could be any more devoid of evil than his past
has been? And, with that in mind, shouldn't we have these philosophical
discussions long before we arrive at the day when science can be so easily
used in the worst possible way? Certainly we cannot expect to wholly prevent
the misuse of science in the way we are discussing here, but we can create a
truly ethical approach to the questions so that, when such misuse does occur
- and rest assured it will occur - we can deal with it as a society and shut
it down quickly before it gets too far. 

In any case, we need to have these discussions to alert the human mind to
the possibilities of the danger we face before we so casually barrel down
the road to a future we have not thought deeply enough about. I am not
saying, of course, that the science of DNA and gene manipulation is
automatically a great evil that we should avoid, but it is no panacea,
either. 

Let us start the debate now. 

Article printed from Stop The ACLU: http://stoptheaclu.com

URL to article:
http://stoptheaclu.com/archives/2007/11/19/the-dangers-of-dna-research/

--------------------------
James Clement, J.D., LL.M.

_______________________________________________
wta-talk mailing list
wta-talk at transhumanism.org
http://www.transhumanism.org/mailman/listinfo/wta-talk

----- End forwarded message -----
-- 
Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a> http://leitl.org
______________________________________________________________
ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.ativel.com http://postbiota.org
8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A  7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE