Possibilities and Problems: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
*The Prolongation of Life | *The Prolongation of Life | ||
*Genetic Engineering | ;*Genetic Engineering | ||
| Line 16: | Line 16: | ||
“In speaking about the biotech revolution, it is important to remember that we are talking about something much broader than genetic engineering. This scientific revolution draws on findings and advances in a number of related fields besides molecular biology, including cognitive neuroscience, population genetics, behavior genetics, psychology, anthropology, evolutionary biology, and neuropharmacology. All of these areas of scientific advance have potential political implications, because they enhance our knowledge of, and hence our ability to manipulate, the source of all human behavior, the brain. | “In speaking about the biotech revolution, it is important to remember that we are talking about something much broader than genetic engineering. This scientific revolution draws on findings and advances in a number of related fields besides molecular biology, including cognitive neuroscience, population genetics, behavior genetics, psychology, anthropology, evolutionary biology, and neuropharmacology. All of these areas of scientific advance have potential political implications, because they enhance our knowledge of, and hence our ability to manipulate, the source of all human behavior, the brain. | ||
Since at least the time of the ancient Greeks, human beings have been arguing over the relative importance of nature versus nurture in human behavior.” Although for much of the twentieth century, culturally determined norms of behavior has been favored by those in the natural and particularly the social sciences, there has been a more recent leaning back towards an understanding of behavior that is more rooted in genetics and biology. There is much talk of “‘genes for’ everything from intelligence to fatness to aggression.” | ;Since at least the time of the ancient Greeks, human beings have been arguing over the relative importance of nature versus nurture in human behavior.” Although for much of the twentieth century, culturally determined norms of behavior has been favored by those in the natural and particularly the social sciences, there has been a more recent leaning back towards an understanding of behavior that is more rooted in genetics and biology. There is much talk of “‘genes for’ everything from intelligence to fatness to aggression.” | ||
This hereditary debate has been highly politicized from the beginning, conservatives generally favoring explanations rooted primarily in nature and “those on the Left” preferring explanations rooted primarily in nurture through culture and environment in general. History (including some not so distant) has seen both extremes of the debate. However, “neither is tenable in light of the currently available empirical evidence.” | ;This hereditary debate has been highly politicized from the beginning, conservatives generally favoring explanations rooted primarily in nature and “those on the Left” preferring explanations rooted primarily in nurture through culture and environment in general. History (including some not so distant) has seen both extremes of the debate. However, “neither is tenable in light of the currently available empirical evidence.” | ||
Until now, there have been only two ways to scientifically disentangle natural from cultural causes of behavior: behavior genetics and cross-cultural anthropology. These two fields of study, each with its strengths and limitations, collect extensive sample data and make inferences about the greater population. Statistically, there has been compelling, and in some cases very strong evidence supporting universal biologically or genetically determined traits. However, these studies still do not provide us with the mechanisms by which these traits are determined. In at least some cases, future studies in Molecular Biology and Genetics may in fact do so. | ;Until now, there have been only two ways to scientifically disentangle natural from cultural causes of behavior: behavior genetics and cross-cultural anthropology. These two fields of study, each with its strengths and limitations, collect extensive sample data and make inferences about the greater population. Statistically, there has been compelling, and in some cases very strong evidence supporting universal biologically or genetically determined traits. However, these studies still do not provide us with the mechanisms by which these traits are determined. In at least some cases, future studies in Molecular Biology and Genetics may in fact do so. | ||
“This kind of scientific knowledge, even in the absence of a technology that makes use of it, has important political implications. We have already seen this happen in the case of higher-level behaviors with genetic roots – intelligence, crime, and sexuality – and there is much more to come.” | ;“This kind of scientific knowledge, even in the absence of a technology that makes use of it, has important political implications. We have already seen this happen in the case of higher-level behaviors with genetic roots – intelligence, crime, and sexuality – and there is much more to come.” | ||
Revision as of 13:44, 5 December 2007
Possibilities
There are several 'advancements' in biotechnology that are within the realm of possibility for the future. The primary four are as follows:
- Increasing Knowledge About the Brain and the Biological Sources of Human Behavior
- Neuropharmacology and the Manipulation of Emotions and Behavior
- The Prolongation of Life
- Genetic Engineering
Increasing Knowledge About the Brain and the Biological Sources of Human Behavior
“In speaking about the biotech revolution, it is important to remember that we are talking about something much broader than genetic engineering. This scientific revolution draws on findings and advances in a number of related fields besides molecular biology, including cognitive neuroscience, population genetics, behavior genetics, psychology, anthropology, evolutionary biology, and neuropharmacology. All of these areas of scientific advance have potential political implications, because they enhance our knowledge of, and hence our ability to manipulate, the source of all human behavior, the brain. ;Since at least the time of the ancient Greeks, human beings have been arguing over the relative importance of nature versus nurture in human behavior.” Although for much of the twentieth century, culturally determined norms of behavior has been favored by those in the natural and particularly the social sciences, there has been a more recent leaning back towards an understanding of behavior that is more rooted in genetics and biology. There is much talk of “‘genes for’ everything from intelligence to fatness to aggression.” ;This hereditary debate has been highly politicized from the beginning, conservatives generally favoring explanations rooted primarily in nature and “those on the Left” preferring explanations rooted primarily in nurture through culture and environment in general. History (including some not so distant) has seen both extremes of the debate. However, “neither is tenable in light of the currently available empirical evidence.” ;Until now, there have been only two ways to scientifically disentangle natural from cultural causes of behavior: behavior genetics and cross-cultural anthropology. These two fields of study, each with its strengths and limitations, collect extensive sample data and make inferences about the greater population. Statistically, there has been compelling, and in some cases very strong evidence supporting universal biologically or genetically determined traits. However, these studies still do not provide us with the mechanisms by which these traits are determined. In at least some cases, future studies in Molecular Biology and Genetics may in fact do so. ;“This kind of scientific knowledge, even in the absence of a technology that makes use of it, has important political implications. We have already seen this happen in the case of higher-level behaviors with genetic roots – intelligence, crime, and sexuality – and there is much more to come.”
Problems
Present
- Genetic Privacy
- Proper Uses of Drugs
- Embryonic Research
- Human Cloning
Future
- The Blurry Line Between Fixing and Improving
- 'Gen-Classes,' Human Rights, and Equality
- Effects of Altering Human Nature
- Human Dignity
