= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Lumifer 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.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (194)
Besides fixing gross genetic abnormalities (e.g. cleft palate and such), I am not sure what kind of universally acceptable traits can you gene-engineer.
8-0 That's a huge claim that I don't see much evidence for. Not to mention that it assumes objective unchanging criteria of what a "mistake" is. I smell hubris.
"Besides that, how did you like the play, Mrs. Lincoln?"
Of course, that kind of abnormality is just what I was referring to.
So, nothing that touches the mind?
Some types of mental retardation are such that everyone who does not have them would agree that they are bad to have.
On the other hand, psychopathy would fail on criterion 1; it can't be defined well enough. (You could avoid mentioning a specific phenotype in your definition and instead define it as "has genes X, Y, and Z", but it would then fail on criterion 3 since people would have little reason to oppose an arbitrary list of genes that is not connected to a specific phenotype.)
What problem do you see with the Hare?
I have no idea what you are talking about.
The Hare checklist is the standard instrument for measuring psychopathy.
The Wikipedia artticle for it has a criticism section.
Also, giving and analyzing the test seems to involve lots of human judgment. Which means that in order for point 1 to be true, everyone will have to trust the judgment of test-givers. I don't think that's going to happen.