I must admit I was shocked when I heard it:
A week later, discussing about transhumanism another friend told me that "Science will solve all problems".
This two sentences were said some months ago but I still have them fixed and would like to write about them.
First of all I follow a principle: Just because we can do something we have not to do it. As an example no one would give a friend with pine nuts if he/she is allergic to them. We don't do it because it is not good for him/her. The reasons why we do something are as important as why we don't do something. In this case (modifying human germinal lines) we have the possibility to gain the piece of knowledge to cure some big deseases (cancers, senescence, autoinmmune diseases...) but at the cost of losing the common biological definition of our humanity.
For me modifying a human is not about the risks and benefits of doing but the reasons that lead to do that modification, if the reasons are bad, or weak we don't really gain anything, we don't solve a problem. At most we could suggest a new tool to do, but not solving a problem, and even on the pool of problems modifying the germinal line of humans won't solve many of the hardest problems of people: what should I do, and why should I do that, I am acting correctly, could I be better?
If there is a possibility that doing this we can cure something is enough for me to do it.That was what a friend said talking about modifying human germinal lines.
A week later, discussing about transhumanism another friend told me that "Science will solve all problems".
This two sentences were said some months ago but I still have them fixed and would like to write about them.
First of all I follow a principle: Just because we can do something we have not to do it. As an example no one would give a friend with pine nuts if he/she is allergic to them. We don't do it because it is not good for him/her. The reasons why we do something are as important as why we don't do something. In this case (modifying human germinal lines) we have the possibility to gain the piece of knowledge to cure some big deseases (cancers, senescence, autoinmmune diseases...) but at the cost of losing the common biological definition of our humanity.
For me modifying a human is not about the risks and benefits of doing but the reasons that lead to do that modification, if the reasons are bad, or weak we don't really gain anything, we don't solve a problem. At most we could suggest a new tool to do, but not solving a problem, and even on the pool of problems modifying the germinal line of humans won't solve many of the hardest problems of people: what should I do, and why should I do that, I am acting correctly, could I be better?