Genetic Engineering: A defence
Wed, 2005-05-04 13:51
#1
Genetic Engineering: A defence
I appreciate that there is a need to monitor the technology but a lot of the anti-vibe seems to be motivated by a general "frankenstein-fear-feeling" rather than any solid scientific facts.
To say that it will lead to a "designer baby" phenomenem is what is known as a "Slippery slope fallacy". To assume genomics is the start of a slippery slope to eugenics is an unfounded presumption.
I see nothing in the technology that "goes against divine order" any more than there is in farming technologies or organ transplant. We are not "Playing God" and more than we are if we cross bred plants to yield good crops as man has for a long time.
I seem to spend a lot of my time trying to defend genetics - there is a lot of potential here for great advancements but some people just won't give it a chance.
j
John
Reading the report from the steering board of the public debate on GM.
It dose seem that most people react negatively toward gm, because of the lack of trustworthy information or long term research on how gm would/would not affect the environment.
Food safety and the issue of weather there 'would be' any benefit to third world countries, in view of the believe expressed by main that the only benefit would be to the companies which promoted it.
John
From Genetics to Genomics to Eugenics. From 2d to 3d to 4d is one hell of an over assumption form a Scientific stand point.
Considering that many of arguments are based on a lack of understanding of the differences between genetics/genomics, I hardly think there is much - 'if any' Scientific bases for the eugenics argument.
Christ. our present understanding of genomics is limited as it is.
LenchenElf
Interesting website touching on a no. of the above topics:
[%sig%]
Radiodenver
I think the fear of cloning is primairly coming from the "religious" sector, and as usual, true to form, its mostly a result of superstition and fears based on the belief that there is some omnipotent being out there and we don't want to offend him/her/it/them/what-ever by pretending we aren't pretending something we fabricated in our minds.
jude
Some of it is but in this country it seems to be the "greenpeace, organic troops" who are breaking into fields wrecking crops and there doesn't seem to be a religious motivation. Certainly the "Playing God" argument is one of a religionist but I don't think religion is the primary source!
Radiodenver
I would agree that it isn't limited to the religious...but, what is the percent...something like 83 percent of the worlds population has some religious belief....that doesn't mean the other 17 percent doesn't have stupid people either.
jude
It isn't so much a case of how many people who oppose the technology are religious but how many cite religious belief as a reason. I have religious convictions but I am very much in favour of the advancement of genetics and genomics. Religion/ genetics I don't see the two as mutually exclusive.
jude
I think the shops are not helping either and are cashing in on people's fears. How many cafes and shops say "none of our food contains GM ingredients" which sends out the signal that GM food is bad. Full stop. This is a clearer anti genetics message than any vatican statement.
Radiodenver
I go back to my base assumption, it's based on superstition. Being religious doesn't make one stupid, and not having religion doesn't make one smart. It's the same thing as religion in my opinion though....superstition.
"We can't do this, it'll ruin humanity"....(apply irrational reasoning here)
jude
I agree that the fear is based on superstition though - definitely!
Smiley
Wasn't it a monk that started all this genetic meddling in the first place, Jude?
jude
Gregor Mendel (who was a monk) did very basic heredity tests on pea-plants. I wouldn't call it meddling. One of the reasons science (and indeed philosophy and art and music and language) has had strong associations with religious is because the monasteries used to be the seat of learning. Monks were the first brewers, cultivated the first gardens and so on because they had the time and resources.
Smiley
So monks are to blame for all the alcoholics too :o)
Radiodenver
I think you got it backwards Jude...
Superstition is based on fear, not vice versa...
Fear is a good thing, it keeps one alive. All this fear of genetics is the fear of unleashing some uncontrollable cataclysmic event that will destroy humanity or make our urine turn orange or something....How we rationalize the source of that cataclysmic event is where the superstition comes into play.
Archergirl
Sorry, jude, monks weren't the first brewers; farmers were. Beer and alcoholic bevvies have been brewed since the agricultural revolution began, some 10,000 years ago. There is a great anthropological debate as to which came first, beer or bread.
jude
Thanks AG - I shall slap the source of my misinformation round the chops!
Archergirl
Ah, buy 'em a beer instead! ;-)
Smiley
I think bread (Naan) probably arrived around the same time as beer - unless they were limited to rice with their curries...
Radiodenver
I would bet bread came first. It's far less complicated to make. Beer was probably the result of the first industrial accicent.
Archergirl
Well, some anthropologists think that beer was discovered first, because after the harvest some cooked grains, left in a pot, fermented (like pease porridge, I guess) and voila! The father of Samuel Adams was born.
Others of course think that bread came first. I tend to lean to the beer side, myself, but I may be partial...;-) It's an interesting (and probably unresolvable) debate.
In your friend's defence, jude, there -is- a connection between beer and religion, as alcoholic brews were and are used in ritual/religious ceremonies for their, er, mind-altering states. I'm sure the monks thought so, too!
Jasper
I want a pet goldfish with 3 heads and six eyes...very cool!
Phenotype will always control and dominate Genotype......and the bugs are evolving faster than stupid old humans! We need to die to survive, not simply modify or extend a life by the stitching on some usless pair of x y genetic combo's into a prettier pattern!
Radiodenver
Oh boy...the infamous "fish tank theory"
Works well if you live in a glass house and are force fed flakes.
jude
Which came first the beer or the bread? Just googled it and gosh aren't there a lot of debates and forums on the subject!