Jiro comments on Thoughts on minimizing designer baby drama - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (194)
Define a "defect" as something where
-- an overwhelming majority of most people agree on how to determine who has it (which may include deferring to doctors, as long as they don't defer to different sets of doctors)
-- most people do not have it
-- an overwhelming majority of most people without it think it's a bad idea to personally have, and a good idea to eliminate from society
Fixing those should not lead to the problems that making enhancements does.
Go back a couple of hundred years. Define the defect as "lack of belief in Jesus Christ". It qualifies under your criteria.
No, it doesn't. That's utterly absurd; are you seriously suggesting that there was ever a time when an overwhelming majority of all people was Christian? You do realize that just because your history book includes mostly Christians doesn't mean there aren't non-European places with non-Christian inhabitants, right?
At any rate, I don't claim and don't believe that this would work for times in the past.
I understand "most people" locally -- that's most of those people who form your society and who influence your culture and political decisions. Were you thinking of some sort of global referendums and, by implication, a global government?
Our present will be the past in the immediate future :-P
If you don't trust the "past" people to change your gene pool, what makes you think "future" people will trust you to change their gene pool?